Nah.
Too many factors affect ship value. Even in a over-constrained format like the Tournaments the above list is wrong, in campaign it never had a chance to be right.
Try building your entire fleet around exploiting key features of D-tier ships and they go SS-tier ez.
:sees Gryphon as D tier but Venture as B tier :
:cries:
Gryphon in D tier, whew.
You realize you can use some weapon group trickery to make them actually good? Sabots linked together with a weapon to force them to fire, whereupon some ship eats 7,000 kinetic burst and 14,000 emp (this can be done 6 times before only having pods left and popping autoforge, for 12/24 rounds of get fluxed), and following up with a hurricane or locust. Retreating and reengaging recharges the system, meaning you can use it twice per combat encounter. The only vanilla ship which can tank a gryphon's focus is the paragon, it lets you actually hunt down [redacted] safely as you can delete the frigates and destroyers making your AI panic with a button click. That is, without resorting to spark drovers/converted hangar cheese.
It's just not a very fun ship to fly yourself because it's a slow foam block, but it is UNDENIABLY one of the strongest ships (admittedly the AI can't use it correctly without abusing weapon group quirks).
A 'this is what I had around at the time' Gryphon build that worked shockingly well: Squall + 3 annihilator racks + 2 harpoon pods, hvd, a few vulcans, Unstable Injector (important), ECCM, medium vents/caps (no loadout design in that campaign). Aggressive officer with missile skill (was ~level 4 when I first put her on) and a few other offensive boosters. Missiles are in separate groups, but in linked fire mode.
I didn't quite expect much out of it, but it just kept getting more and more kills so I never bothered changing the loadout. Watching it solo hunt down and murder an officered (level 14) enemy Doom that had a decent loadout was eye opening. Between the expanded racks and the forge it still has missiles at the end of multi capital bounties so... not sure when its supposed to get bad.
Centurions are also really good. The more I play with them the more I like them. With SO, front shield conversion, machine guns, an antimatter blaster, a reaper, and fleet aggression cranked up to max so as not to require officers, they are nasty. Nearly as good as omens, though they trade the amazing utility of the EMP emitter for anti-shield firepower and toughness. The combo of 360 shield --> Damper field with SO to lower flux at double speed while taking reduced damage --> shield extending twice as fast is very powerful.
I'll leave Thaago to extol the virtues of the various frigates, as I don't use them much.
I used to not use frigates, but tournament testing has revealed to me that they really pack a lot of value, even without officers. They do die though...
Putting variants in the same tier feels wrong. Pirate Shrike is clearly better than HT Shrike, why are they in the same tier? Pather Cerberus is a beast, while the normal one is meh. Hegemony Kite is actually great, while the pather one is worse than the default/pirate ones. Pather Brawler/Lasher is much better than default, etc.
If you argue that the differences aren't big enough to warrant a tier of difference, why is Onslaught (XIV) higher than the default? 100 extra armor on a low-tech capital is barely noticeable, while free SO on a frigate translates to ~25% extra OP.
I can tell you off the bat Drover, Heroin, Sunder, HH, Tempist and Hyperion are NOT B tier.
So I was thinking about which ship is stronger
Stronger at doing what, exactly? And at what point of the game? AI controlled or in player's hands?
Nothing beats Salvage Rig if your aim is self-sustaining fleet, same goes for Shepherd and early game exploration/looting. Gryphon/Pirate Falcon/Doom/etc is a mean beast, capable of deleting entire fleets in human hands, while being pretty meh support vessel under AIs. Dominator is a powerhouse that will plow through early game fleets without any effort, but at later stages it turns into punching bag with zero chances of survival. And so on, and so forth...
Conquest in S tier? My man I do enjoy piloting a conquest in an unoptimized double broadside build but it is nowhere close. B tier would be pushing it.Conquest is no lower than A tier, there is no just tier list where the Conquest rates lower than the Onslaught.
Alright, I feel like sharing my own hot takes today:Nothing seems super out of the ordinary for the rules you set, but I'm curious, what's the reasoning behind Eagle being C tier? Sure it's nothing crazy but it seems like a solid AI ship all around.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/3GsHgGx.png)[close]
Assumptions: combat only, AI controlled, accounting for DP budget, assuming they're being used at the appropriate phase of the game (you're not running many frigates in cap-spam late game), no LP ships (since there's such a drastic difference between default and restored versions), no skins unless they're noticeably different.
I've mentioned before somewhere that I think most cruisers are pretty overrated for credit/DP budgets (especially after taking limited officers into consideration), so it's mostly that. And in the end ~29 out of 51 rated ships puts it close to average which imo is not inappropriate. "Nothing crazy" is an apt descriptor for it.Alright, I feel like sharing my own hot takes today:Nothing seems super out of the ordinary for the rules you set, but I'm curious, what's the reasoning behind Eagle being C tier? Sure it's nothing crazy but it seems like a solid AI ship all around.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/3GsHgGx.png)[close]
Assumptions: combat only, AI controlled, accounting for DP budget, assuming they're being used at the appropriate phase of the game (you're not running many frigates in cap-spam late game), no LP ships (since there's such a drastic difference between default and restored versions), no skins unless they're noticeably different.
...
The venture is B- because it offers benefits in relation to the Mora carriers, which compete for the same niche, those benefits are being cheaper (15 DP Vs. 20 DP, 3 fuel/lightyear Vs. 4 fuel/lightyear), having a better shield(7.000 base capacitors Vs. 4.000 base capacitors, 300 dissipation Vs. 200 dissipation, same everything else*), which is more important for suport ships than for main line ships, and having the surveing equipament hullmod.
The Gryphon is D tier because it does not offer anything substatially better or different than the Heron, which is it's main competitor for it's role, it's not cheaper(20 DP Vs. 20 DP, 3 fuel/lightyear Vs. 3 fuel/lightyear), it does not have a better shield (5.000 base capacitors Vs. 5.000 base capacitors, 200 dissipation Vs. 300 dissipation, same everything else*) and no campain hullmod to help, even something as simple as a hullmod that make it cost half the supplies used on the campain map would make it go higher.
This in combination whit the extra danger Gryphon needs to expose itself to fight brings the conclusion that there is no reason to use the Gryphon other than for Roleplay and no carriers runs. If it was really terrible it would be F tier.
...
Alright, I feel like sharing my own hot takes today:Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/3GsHgGx.png)[close]
Assumptions: combat only, AI controlled, accounting for DP budget, assuming they're being used at the appropriate phase of the game (you're not running many frigates in cap-spam late game), no LP ships (since there's such a drastic difference between default and restored versions), no skins unless they're noticeably different.
How are you lot even making these?
Hm...Alright, I feel like sharing my own hot takes today:Assumptions: combat only, AI controlled, accounting for DP budget, assuming they're being used at the appropriate phase of the game (you're not running many frigates in cap-spam late game), no LP ships (since there's such a drastic difference between default and restored versions), no skins unless they're noticeably different.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/3GsHgGx.png)[close]
Comments: for me Condors to low C almost D tier and Gemini to C tier. With the current iteration of Reserve Deployments, the single deck of the Gemini is nearly better than the 2 decks of the Condor. At the same time it has medium ballistics so it can mount flak and/or a long range poking gun like an HVD. Its also faster... the Gemini is honestly a better combat ship than the Condor while also being a good freighter.
I also think Tempests are B tier and not A tier. For 8DP its competing with the Shrike/pirate shrike, and I honestly don't think its that much better. Honestly in AI control I think I'd actually prefer a well built Shrike than a Tempest, does that make them low B/C tier?
Without balance changes I'd move the Hammerhead to S tier and the Enforcer to C tier, purely because of their ability to be SO Assault Chaingun delivery mechanisms.
When taking into account factors outside of combat, I rate the Falcon as C tier because of its burn speed: supplementing a destroyer fleet with a few Falcons can be a good move and doesn't slow it down.
Isn't this around the 3rd ship tier list thread that's cropped up?
At least make a Fighter tier list or a Weapon tier list to spice things up a bit, at this point
Hm...https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=18804.0
I do however remember someone (Hiruma Kai? pairedeciseaux?) pitting 6 Condors vs 5 Drovers (or 12v10) with the former winning. Would 8 Geminis beat 6 Drovers the same way? - I'm guessing not, but I should run it to see. And then would 10 Gemini beat 9 Condors? Flak helps a lot, I suppose.
Ah, I was thinking of this post (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=18791.msg293626#msg293626), but yeah that thread sums it up much better.Hm...https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=18804.0
I do however remember someone (Hiruma Kai? pairedeciseaux?) pitting 6 Condors vs 5 Drovers (or 12v10) with the former winning. Would 8 Geminis beat 6 Drovers the same way? - I'm guessing not, but I should run it to see. And then would 10 Gemini beat 9 Condors? Flak helps a lot, I suppose.
I have a conspiracy theory that the person who starts these tier list posts intentionally makes one that's, well let's just say "weird" so it gets more responses since others want to give out their "right" opinions. This is the 3rd one and in every one OP made a very questionable tier list. Now obviously tier lists in this game aren't nowhere near as important or tell you much in any way since there's too many variables. I mean it's just a simple ship tier list and you can see everybody has their own logic by which they sort the tiers (which is imo dumb, you should be ideally making it the same way as OP to avoid confusion). Someone here made one with 3 tiers... like what? You can't tell anything from that, I'd argue you'd need at least 6 tiers to easily put ships into their own place.As you say, tier lists are pretty unhelpful in general since you're mapping a high dimensional data point (how "good" a ship is) into a single line. For me, the only way to make it somewhat useful is to be very specific about what the output represents.
I thought of posting my own one here since I already made it for the last thread but now I see it needs some changes. And I honestly can't even think in the current vanilla since the whole tournament used the balance changes from the patch notes. So I'd be making changes only to make the list completely irrelevant in whatever time the update drops.
Note to those who'll still put their tier lists here: Specify if your list assumes all ships piloted by AI, player or just the average. Ignoring campaign elements is kinda weird since the whole point of the list is to give a picture how each ship is useful in the actual game. I mean RustyCabbage put the Mule and Shepherd in D tier, that's crazy (yes I know it only assumes combat).
That said, the atlas MkII is a godlike ship for 24 DP and YOU CANNOT CHANGE MY MIND though I respect your right to try. ;DDon't get me wrong, I'd love it too if I ever got to use it in a mission or tournament setting. But aside from memes, I'm just very unwilling to lug around an OP-starved 6 burn ship (yeah, Tugs, but at that point I could run something better, so at meme status it remains).
Any tierlist that doesn't have Afflictor at SS rating is a failure imo. What else can defeat 30 to 40 times it's own DP worth of enemies?Not the afflictor. Even with the best piloting possible it has neither the PPT nor the raw missile capacity to inflict 240+ DP worth of damages per sortie.
Any tierlist that doesn't have Afflictor at SS rating is a failure imo. What else can defeat 30 to 40 times it's own DP worth of enemies?Not the afflictor. Even with the best piloting possible it has neither the PPT nor the raw missile capacity to inflict 240+ DP worth of damages per sortie.
If I had HELMUT's level of piloting skill, I still wouldn't enjoy the play style of twitchy ships like frigates, or most phase ships, and certainly not phase frigates. Since I can do more with larger ships for much longer periods of time, with more enjoyment and much less stress, there's exactly 0 chance I'd give an Afflictor SS-tier.
Yeah, Atlas Mk II's burn speed completely kills its viability.That said, the atlas MkII is a godlike ship for 24 DP and YOU CANNOT CHANGE MY MIND though I respect your right to try. ;DDon't get me wrong, I'd love it too if I ever got to use it in a mission or tournament setting. But aside from memes, I'm just very unwilling to lug around an OP-starved 6 burn ship (yeah, Tugs, but at that point I could run something better, so at meme status it remains).
I mean RustyCabbage put the Mule and Shepherd in D tier, that's crazy (yes I know it only assumes combat).Mule belongs there. It's a subpar freighter, a subpar combat ship and it puts your cargo in danger.
Afflictor might be pretty powerful in player hands, but since I can't stand phase ships, I don't use it at all. I have to acknowledge that it can be very powerful, though it requires substantial skill.I do not like phase ships aside from Doom because every time I see the AI pilot them, all they do is run away until they run out of PPT then die when CR decays to zero before every other ship. They make good playership bombers, though. Doom, on the other hand, is great for either player or AI use, and it can brawl. Fighting against them, is annoying, and player has to jump through hoops to prevent his allies from giving openings to enemy phase ships.
It's genuinely difficult to make out what's going on design-wise since the video resolution is not so hot, but a maxed player skills would appear to change the original scenario a bit, no? The Falcons seem like they'd require 2 barrages of those AMBs without maxed skills if I've done my napkin-math right, which would mean you'd have at-best run out of ammo by the 15th Falcon without them (if PPT didn't get you first, without Combat Endurance skill), and of course that requires going heavily into combat skills with all the opportunity costs that entails. Even forgetting that this isn't actually a Vanilla Afflictor, which IIRC changes some weapon mounts for more flexibility in addition to across-the-board stat boosts, though I can only actually see 3 AMBs for sure and so can't tell if you actually got any use out of that part with this particular build)Spoilerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1fF21o0Ntc[close]
Maxed out character-piloted Afflictor vs 300 DP worth of Falcons. I also did a similar test vs roughly 300 dp worth of standard sim capitals/cruisers, didn't record it though. Technically it's Cabal Afflictor with very minor upgrades, but difference isn't enough to affect the outcome.
Maxed out character-piloted Afflictor vs 300 DP worth of Falcons. I also did a similar test vs roughly 300 dp worth of standard sim capitals/cruisers, didn't record it though. Technically it's Cabal Afflictor with very minor upgrades, but difference isn't enough to affect the outcome.
An Afflictor can be an amazing ship in player hands, depending on the player and the situation. However, they also are very intolerant of player mistakes. I wouldn't solely rely on it in an iron man run, for example. And even player piloted afflictors can struggle against campaign high tech bounty/tri-tach fleets or redacted fleets. So saying they're the best single ship in all combat situations (which is the typical meaning behind a SS rating in a combat context), is probably not correct. There are counters, and those counters exist in actual campaign play. And certainly for some things outside of combat, like trading, it is a sub-optimal ship.
why do you have an Odyssey in your campaign fleet?To fling wrecks and enemy ships accross the map like an angry sealion.
An Afflictor can be an amazing ship in player hands, depending on the player and the situation. However, they also are very intolerant of player mistakes. I wouldn't solely rely on it in an iron man run, for example. And even player piloted afflictors can struggle against campaign high tech bounty/tri-tach fleets or redacted fleets. So saying they're the best single ship in all combat situations (which is the typical meaning behind a SS rating in a combat context), is probably not correct. There are counters, and those counters exist in actual campaign play. And certainly for some things outside of combat, like trading, it is a sub-optimal ship.
TT bounties are primary targets for Afflictors - getting that Astral out of commission before fleets even meet counts for a lot, same for normally hard to catch Herons. Dooms are genuinely dangerous though, unphasing around them without having dropped speed to zero in advance is a potential instant death. Need to be very aware of their positions and reach.
Redacted are not Afflictor's bane either. You can't directly kill a Radiant with Reaper Afflictor in non-suicidal manner, but you can ALMOST kill it with Reaper Afflictor and then safely finish the job with AM Afflictor. Or just use AM from the start, though that would be slow vs up-skilled armor.
There are very few situations when AM Afflictor really can't do anything. As someone noted, Xyphos spam would be a problem, but you probably still could pick off ships that got too far from carriers. Afflictor is also NOT good at soloing high tier space stations - stations have near perfect overlapping 360 coverage, so there is often no safe attack trajectory that won't get you killed/badly damaged in 2 seconds needed to rephase. But in almost any fleet combat situation Afflictor can kill many times it's DP worth of ships.
Fleet composition-wise my goal is up to 5 Afflictors, a player capital (Conquest, Odyssey or some fast mod capital), officer-piloted capitals/cruisers + carriers, logistics. A few reserve player ships of other types optional.
Requiring logistic usefulness as part of SS rating would be silly imo - no ship can have both top tier combat performance and logistic profile.
One of the things that hurt Venture most was losing it's fighter bay and having brick drones locked in.
I'd like to see that capability return, even if it means losing the bay entirely and replacing it with built-in converted hangar.
I started playing after the change, was the Venture too strong or something with fighters? I'd see that strong but not something that anyone would see as overpowered. Am I missing something, what was the thinking at the time?Iirc it happened before the XIV ships were a thing - so 0.7ish?
The big mining drones could stand to be betterThey could.
The big mining drones could stand to be betterI modded them to have 2 mining lasers & and extra 500 range. +1 OP