Fractal Softworks Forum
Starsector => General Discussion => Topic started by: Grievous69 on September 01, 2021, 12:13:07 PM
-
Yes, everyone and their mother agrees it's super strong right now and it needs to get slapped on the wrist a bit. But that's the thing, it should get toned down not to be oppressive, not absolutely destroyed and thrown in the back alley. I recall some previous examples where such things happened (hello Drover) so I'm just asking for appropriate changes. We finally have a competent high tech warship and I'd hate to see it become Aurora 2.0, or actually 0.5 when I think about it, an overpriced player only ship.
The reason I made this post is because I randomly remembered a comment somewhere saying how it's gonna get bumped to 20 DP which will be hilarious without any other changes. Apogee is 18 DP... Thank you for listening Mr. developer.
Feel free to tell me if I'm in denial and it should definitely get annihilated.
-
On the plus side, if it does get nerfed into the ground there's a chance it will get hilariously overbuffed in some future update.
Looking at you, Doom.
-
Apogee feels underpriced a bit, being able to tank things while killing things with Plasma and Locusts. If Fury is 20, so should Apogee. Honestly, Fury probably would have been worth 18 DP at most in the previous release. Energy weapons were buffed this release and they have Energy Mastery.
Aurora was mediocre last release (good mostly for bullying things smaller than it, which was not worth 30 OP), but the improvements to various energy weapons, especially to Ion Pulser, and Pulse Laser to a lesser extent, made it better.
-
Apogee feels underpriced a bit, being able to tank things while killing things with Plasma and Locusts. If Fury is 20, so should Apogee. Honestly, Fury probably would have been worth 18 DP at most in the previous release. Energy weapons were buffed this release and they have Energy Mastery.
I share the exact same thoughts.
And yeah, Doom is a whole another can of worms, can't wait to see what happens to it next patch.
-
One more thing: Throw a bone to the high-tech blueprint pack and add Fury to it! Fury is the high-tech's Falcon, and (standard) Falcon is in the midline blueprint pack.
-
I thought the only change (and I could be falsely remembering) is that its DP is being raised to 20. No other stat changes. That's more than reasonable, I think. It's more of a warship than an Apogee and it will reflect that but it's still no Aurora, overall.
The best thing about the Fury, honestly, is that's it's not super rare. You find them relatively frequently on markets and they make a good flagship. My only hope is that the Burn Speed doesn't get nerfed with the DP increase. That's what makes it a "Light" Cruiser, in my opinion.
@Megas
Total agreement. It should be a "standard" High Tech blueprint.
-
Apogee is not fast like other high-tech, but when it gets the best weapons, it feels almost like a heavy cruiser, but has the cost of an elite destroyer or light cruiser. Falcon just feels like a Hammerhead that is bigger and faster, but with less firepower (because it trades power from AAF for speed from Jets).
Last release, I would consider Apogee superior to Aurora. This release, I am not sure. The changes in 0.95 were kind to high-tech (except for Paragon).
-
I think I already suggested somewhere that Apogee and Fury should switch places in the blueprint pack. It makes the most sense. High tech blueprint package in general is very barren, so it actually confirms the doubts of people who think the tech types are genuine tiers. When there's not even a half the number of ships in the high tech package, new folks are obviously going to believe they're super rare strong ships. Not saying it should have tons of ships, but a single frigate, destroyer and a cruiser is kinda lame.
@Foof
Wouldn't it be super weird if there's a "light" cruiser having 20 DP cost and then an exploration ship (which is actually great in combat) with TWO large slots being 18 DP. It's the only non capital high tech ship that has large mounts, and it's not even made for combat, supposedly.
-
I rather have both Apogee AND Fury in the high-tech pack. The high-tech pack does not have enough ships in it.
Not saying it should have tons of ships, but a single frigates, destroyer and a cruiser is kinda lame.
And the cruiser Apogee seems to be designed like a combat freighter (exploration), yet it overperforms enough to be on par with a proper warship.
On another note, Venture used to be similarly as good as Apogee until it gained civilian hull and mining pods forced into its fighter bays in 0.8a.
-
I think I already suggested somewhere that Apogee and Fury should switch places in the blueprint pack. It makes the most sense. High tech blueprint package in general is very barren, so it actually confirms the doubts of people who think the tech types are genuine tiers. When there's not even a half the number of ships in the high tech package, new folks are obviously going to believe they're super rare strong ships. Not saying it should have tons of ships, but a single frigate, destroyer and a cruiser is kinda lame.
@Foof
Wouldn't it be super weird if there's a "light" cruiser having 20 DP cost and then an exploration ship (which is actually great in combat) with TWO large slots being 18 DP. It's the only non capital high tech ship that has large mounts, and it's not even made for combat, supposedly.
That says more about the Apogee than the Fury. The Apogee is probablly underpriced, as well, but ever since the Medium Energies in the back no longer can focus fire with the Large Energy, I think the Apogee has had its overall combat profile nerfed significantly. Its true saving grace is its absurd shield with high base capacity. It's really not bringing that much more firepower to a fight than a Sunder, especially with the Large Missile being offset a little, however unlike a Sunder, it can take a pounding.
I wouldn't complain if they were both 20 DP. One's a tough exploration craft that can shoot its way out if it has to and the other is a very fast opportunist. However, I don't think it would be too "weird" for the 20 DP Fury to be faster than the 18 DP Apogee that also has decent cargo/fuel capacity.
-
That says more about the Apogee than the Fury. The Apogee is probablly underpriced, as well, but ever since the Medium Energies in the back no longer can focus fire with the Large Energy, I think the Apogee has had its overall combat profile nerfed significantly. Its true saving grace is its absurd shield with high base capacity. It's really not bringing that much more firepower to a fight than a Sunder, especially with the Large Missile being offset a little, however unlike a Sunder, it can take a pounding.
It is hard enough to focus-fire anything other than beams even when Apogee's mounts could fire forward before. (Apogee had to practically kiss the enemy to have rear heavy blasters pound things, and kissing things in melee range is not what you want Apogee to do when you wanted to exploit extra shot range granted by two ion drones.) They are more useful as (anti-frigate) PD, and for that role, pulse lasers are fine.
Apogee can fire plasma cannon almost continuously. Capitals (aside from Radiant) can only comfortably support two (or two plus less powerful weapons), and they cost more than double than Apogee. It is also better than two heavy blasters non-SO Aurora could support (which is why I think Aurora was overpriced before). Locusts or MIRVs are not insignificant. Aurora almost needed sabots to support heavy blasters. Apogee (today) can shoot plasma willy-nilly.
Now, Apogee lost the old Sensor drones that extended shot range and sight radius, although unlimited Active Flares gave it the anti-missile PD it desperately needed.
-
I really like to have a 15 DP High Tech Cruiser, I always happen to have exactly 15 DP left somehow.
The main downside of the Apogees L guns is, they are hardpoints, a single L Energy Turret would be a nice Concept used by the Champion, a high tech alternative would be funny.
The Venture could at least get a second mining pod, and if it stays civil Salvage Gantry, or a militarized heg version without mining drones and a hybrid turret instead of energy.
-
Unpopular opinion: I think Apogees are actually priced ok at 18 because they aren't that good. They combine being slow with being short ranged so can't deal with asymmetric situations, and their enormous shield radius makes so they block allies from firing. The large missile is quite good and the large energy is potentially good for things that come to it, but they are extremely easy to lose in hard fights because of their lack of mobility. I've found them to be more liability than asset.
I'd be ok with Furies at 20 and Apogees at 18 because Furies are better!
-
Wanted to remind myself of the precise stats between the two ships and there's one thing that doesn't make sense. Fury, a light cruiser spends 3 fuel/ly while Apogee spends only 2. This is such a minor thing but I swear some of the logistics stats for ships in this game are truly weird.
@Thaago
I didn't know it was possible to start a sentence with "unpopular opinion" and then actually say something that's unpopular, well done mate. Fair points tho but for me the slow speed doesn't make a difference, its role in the fleet is to tank and fight back and it does that incredibly well. Obviously Furies are better for certain tasks but if my fleet is full of glass cannons and carriers, then I'd take Apogee over Fury any day.
-
y'all remember back when a single Apogee with a tachyon lance could rule the world ?
-
15 to 20 is a crazy big nerf, though. I'm definitely against nerfing Apogee, too. We already don't have enough ships in the 12-18 DP range, especially with both Furies and Falcons (P) getting bumped to 20.
In general, it feels like the game is experiencing a major "DP creep". Capitals are getting from 40-45 to 50-60 and light cruisers are now 20 instead of 15. Particularly insulting when the obnoxious phase ships and hyperions are allowed to stay broken forever.
-
Unpopular opinion: I think Apogees are actually priced ok at 18 because they aren't that good. They combine being slow with being short ranged so can't deal with asymmetric situations, and their enormous shield radius makes so they block allies from firing.
Agreed on that one, Apogees are very nice for holding the line but have serious trouble finishing anything and are prone to getting caught by the real heavies. Also have a really weak system.
Taking eco stats into account I think in this version they are well worth the 18 DP, but there is no need for an increase if ballistics/lowtech get boosts (making the range disadvantage/getting caught problems worse).
Furies with 90 base speed and a system that lets them smash smaller ships are at least on par, despite the weaker stats.
Wanted to remind myself of the precise stats between the two ships and there's one thing that doesn't make sense. Fury, a light cruiser spends 3 fuel/ly while Apogee spends only 2. This is such a minor thing but I swear some of the logistics stats for ships in this game are truly weird.
Apogee's main shtick is having good eco stats for a combat ship, and being a durable brick to fall back on.
Furies are also 9 burn to Apogee's 8.
-
15 to 20 is a crazy big nerf, though.
Yuuuup, this is the same as a 45 DP capital getting bumped to 60. Overperforming ships should be slowly brought down, not kneejerk reaction nerf them because people are yelling. For 2 Furies you could deploy a whole capital, that seems a bit off.
-
@Thaago
I agree the Fury is the better warship. I think the Apogee is in a weird spot where it's supposed to be an exploration ship but not completely defenseless. I don't think it needs changing but if the Fury were to get bumped to 20 DP (which by the way, I'm still not sure where I got that), I can understand the argument "But the Apogee..."
Like I said, the only thing really going for the Apogee in a fleet situation is that it's a brick. Its damage potential isn't that much higher than a Sunder's.
Also re: Apogee's fuel/ly - it's a top of the line exploration ship. I have no problem with it being efficient in hyperspace. The Fury having Burn 9 is so it doesn't flow down Destroyer fleets like the Falcon. It's apples and oranges to me and both ships have their reasons for the logistics profile that they have.
-
hyperions are allowed to stay broken forever.
To be fair, this is the first release in years when Hyperion is good again, instead of just a worse phase ship.
All this talk about DP makes me wonder, what do you guys consider to be the most balanced (as in, the most accurate DP rating) ship in the game, that you would use to measure all other ships?
-
For me it's less about the individual ship as a measuring stick, but the ratio between ship classes. I would say the core midline lineup (centurion - monitor - hammerhead - falcon - eagle - champion - conquest) has a good set of DP values.
-
Yeah I was also going to mention that midline ships are pretty well balanced. If I'd have to choose a single one that would probably be Conquest since I have played soo much with it, I'm well aware of its strengths and weaknesses and think the cost is just right. Eagle is a close second, now that I think about it I don't recall it ever getting buffs/nerfs.
But I don't see how that could be used to measure other ships. Comparing a Conquest directly to a single Fury is a bit hard. If it does get bumped to 20, you could propose a question. Which is better, 2 Furies or 1 Conquest? Even then, it depends on the role and your fleet composition. When I look at Fury I'm comparing it to other cruisers, mainly those close to its cost as that seems the most logical way of figuring things out. Obviously we all agree it's stronger than a base Falcon but since there's a bit of disagreement about the 20 DP cost it's clear it's not THAT broken.
Also the point about already having a ton of 20+ DP ships stands, and we're getting yet another 20 DP cruiser next patch. It's useful to have those cheaper ships when you already deployed most of your fleet but don't want a squishy frigate/destroyer.
-
@ Grievous: Or two Shrikes instead of one Fury.
For me, the main reason for me to use Fury is a Shrike that is not too flimsy. I did not play it much because it was a rare ship. I got Doom blueprint before I got Fury blueprint, and I got enough Dooms to cheese the game before I could build enough Furies.
I would not mind Fury going up to 18 DP, but 20? I don't know.
If I wanted to compare cruisers with Apogee, I would pick Dominator or Aurora. Dominator (and maybe Champion too) for similar role, and Aurora for energy-and-missile based firepower.
Apogee looks like a bargain compared to the heavy cruisers. Aurora is only decent now because of energy weapon buffs. Last release, it was mediocre against big ships, and why pay 30 DP when I pay 35 to 40 DP for Doom or battleship that can bully everything instead of only small ships.
How much DP would Fury be worth with weapon balance from last release? I probably would say 15 DP. (And Aurora worth 25 to 27 DP, and Apogee worth up to 20 to 22 DP.) I think changes in energy weapon balance (both from weapon tweaks and skills) helped make typical high-tech ships better than they were. (Slow stuff like Paragon suffered by indirect nerf. No changes to stats, but defenses get chewed through faster.)
-
Re: DP costs
Eagle is probably the Gold Standard for me. It is the definition of a jack-of-all-trades and doesn't suffer from anything in particular, inluding being overcosted deployment-wise. Other ships are better for cost but the Eagle is in the Goldilocks Zone at 22. It's not light, not heavy and neither slow nor fast.
From a fleet standpoint, the Fury is every bit worth 20 DP, if I compare it to the 22 DP Eagle. I think I might even take the Fury over the Eagle more often than not. That's why 15 DP for the Fury was absurd. However, with the Dominator getting buffs and the existence of the Champion, "Heavy" Cruisers are a real thing. The Aurora is the one that, at 30 DP, can be hit-or-miss. A generic Aurora probably isn't worth 30 but a highly-specialized missile boat or AM Blaster Aurora is ridiculous.
-
How would Fury compare to Medusa or two Shrikes or two Tempests?
-
I'd gladly take 2 Tempests or 2 Scarabs over a single Fury, because Furies were the ships with most deaths in my fleet (all with maxed officers). I pretty much think of Fury as 2 Shrikes slapped together so it would be pretty cool to see it have 16 DP cost but maybe a bit weaker. And the Medusa comparison is a bit hard because it's such a survivable ship that can dictate what fights to take, meanwhile Fury goes in and prays it survives. Medusa is obviously weaker but not by that much as one would think (2 ballistic slots make a world of difference).
-
Two month ago Alex wrote that Fury and Pirate Falcon DP cost were increased to 20:
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=22185.msg334588#msg334588
In-game Fury has the "light cruiser" designation, but... I can't find reference to it, I'm pretty sure I read Alex explaining Fury should be considered as a "fast cruiser", meaning fast as a light cruiser / a destroyer, but as powerful as a normal cruiser. Which is... what it is!
I 100% share FooF assessment:
From a fleet standpoint, the Fury is every bit worth 20 DP, if I compare it to the 22 DP Eagle. I think I might even take the Fury over the Eagle more often than not. That's why 15 DP for the Fury was absurd.
Yes, even at 20 DP, if other stats don't change, Fury would still be a really good deal considering the package.
20 DP for Apogee would be appropriate too. In a late game fleet I may keep it with High Intensity Laser + ITU, because it's viability as a brawler with Plasma Cannon decreases in my experience.
-
I'd take two (current) Tempests with Wolfpack over a single (current) Fury. The Fury is a fine ship but Wolfpack Tactics, officers, and HEF on Tempests makes them kind of ridiculous. It's two officers, sure, but that's just where Tempests are at. Likewise the similarly priced Hyperion is better than a Fury. That has more to do with the current power of High Tech frigates combined with skils than a deficiency with the Fury.
Furies can actually hold up to fire, unlike Shrikes, so 2 Shrikes don't appeal to me that much. They have all the disadvantages of Destroyers in a frame not much sturdier than a Frigate. Shrikes are good early but melt late game because of their overall squishiness. Furies are still viable late because they have pretty good flux stats. Also, 2 Shrikes will get killed piecemeal while you have to take the Fury out completely. No divide and conquer there.
The Medusa is an interesting comparison but its apples and oranges to me. The Medusa is an expert opportunist but the Fury has to blaze in and still take a punch. If anything, the Fury is designed to hunt Medusas because it will win a straight-up fight and can keep up with the Medusa if it tries to flee. However, I'd take a Medusa as a harasser over a Fury anyday because it can get out of hairy situations much better.
-
I mean tempest is getting nerfed/reworked, so I don't think it's the right point of comparison.
-
Feel free to tell me if I'm in denial and it should definitely get annihilated.
15 to 20 is a crazy big nerf, though.
Yuuuup, this is the same as a 45 DP capital getting bumped to 60. Overperforming ships should be slowly brought down, not kneejerk reaction nerf them because people are yelling. For 2 Furies you could deploy a whole capital, that seems a bit off.
[/quote]
I'll note the Radiant is getting its DP increased from 40 to 60 DP, which is a 50% jump, while the Fury is only a 33% increase. Do you feel that raising the Radiant's cost to 60 DP is annihilating it or a kneejerk reaction? Personally, I don't think the size of the change matters. The question is, what is the appropriate final balance point that it should be at, not what the relative change is. Keep in mind, this isn't a next day patch kind of change. It's happening over more than 6 months by the time next patch comes out. So people have had plenty of time to mull it over and play with it at the current deployment cost.
Also, do you have thoughts on the 15 to 20 DP jump for the Pirate Falcon? It is an identical sized jump, and we've had that ship through multiple releases now.
I will note that a DP change is primarily a late game fleet composition nerf, as opposed to an early game or mid-game balance change. The 5 extra supplies here and there tend to be lost in the noise for me. I still think the ship will be excellent for leading destroyer/frigate packs and better than a Falcon as a first cruiser.
As for where its deployment cost should be is a tough call. Fully kitted, they have strong shield tank combined with high mobility, which means they survive extremely well. Those two factors seem to offset the AI's tendency to get into bad positions via plasma burn. Throw on SO and they can be packing the effective firepower of 1 and a third Plasma cannons backed by ion cannons and quite reasonable PPT.
Having played with it, 15 DP does feel too low. 9000 flux capacity, is 600 flux dissipation, 90 speed, possibility for 360 shields at 0.7 efficiency. It all adds up to fairly strong package. Would 18 DP be the right number? Maybe? It's only 10% different from 20 DP, and well, 10% is easily lost in officer skills, fitting, fleet composition, fleet orders, and player piloting. I think Furies will definitely still see use at a 20 DP point - although you probably won't be seeing end game fleets composed solely of Furies at that point, but used to fill a fleet need and compliment other ships. Or maybe you will. I remember seeing a post somewhere of a player testing their current Fury fleet assuming the new DP cost and it still had no losses against Ordos with Radiants, so likely still strong enough for typical end game.
-
Also, do you have thoughts on the 15 to 20 DP jump for the Pirate Falcon? It is an identical sized jump, and we've had that ship through multiple releases now.
Missed that. I think that is dumb. What makes it powerful enough to be worth 20 DP (well, anything more than Falcon's 15 DP) to begin with, a loadout with machine guns and reapers in the missiles? Should Alex start making XIV ships cost more DP than standard because they are more powerful?
As for Radiant being 60 DP. It is stronger than Paragon, but it is an SNK boss ship that requires top Tech skills to unlock. If it had to compete with +1 s-mod like today, I still think 40 DP is fine where it is at because it is the only thing keeping me from not getting Spec.Mods (which is also overpowered if fully exploited, especially on phase ships), and the other Remnant ships generally being too weak to justify Automated Ships. That said, with the skill changes coming, Radiant being at 40 DP would probably be too low. 60 DP may be okay because if nothing else changes, it is still stronger than Paragon, and still requires skills to unlock (but does not compete with other overpowered skills in Tech).
-
What makes it powerful enough to be worth 20 DP (well, anything more than Falcon's 15 DP) to begin with, a loadout with machine guns and reapers in the missiles? Should Alex start making XIV ships cost more DP than standard because they are more powerful?
Presumably the new skill that lowers DP for unofficered ships could be too opressive with full missile falcon spam or something. As always with crazy balance changes, blame the local e-sports community (fleet building tournaments). :)
Doubt XIV is getting DP increases. Muh poor low tech is already bad uwu.
-
Haven't the AI tournaments shown that falcon P is very strong compared to other things of equal DP?
-
I'll note the Radiant is getting its DP increased from 40 to 60 DP, which is a 50% jump, while the Fury is only a 33% increase. Do you feel that raising the Radiant's cost to 60 DP is annihilating it or a kneejerk reaction?
Does that change come with a buff to other Remnant ships?
In the current version of the game the presence of Radiants is literally the only factor that decides whether I attack or avoid a Remnant fleet. If there are no Radiants I don't have much to worry about, if there are Radiants I may be in trouble. It seems vastly superior to everything else.
Now while it's certainly too good at 40 DP I don't think it compares well to the Fury, or any other regular ship for that matter. It's the sole capital of a faction that's supposed to be a strange and mysterious threat and the player needs a level 5 skill to field it at all. Nerfing it basically requires buffing a number of other Remnant designs to keep them relevant, at least in my opinion.
-
Haven't the AI tournaments shown that falcon P is very strong compared to other things of equal DP?
Yeah. While there were some counter builds that people came up with to specifically combat them for exhibition matches (Shield bypass (DR's version before the current patch) paragon was one!), Falcon P's with converted hangars + Omens came out of nowhere and dominated that tournament. The tournament rules prohibited the kind of sweeping and specialized builds that were needed to beat them so the eventual winner was a copycat whose Falcon P's + Omens were slightly better at killing Falcon P's + Omens than the original's.
In campaign missiles got a bump because hard enemy fleets are smaller in number/size than before, and skills can boost 2x to 3x ammo, so running out of ammo before killing a critical mass of enemies is much less of a concern. Falcon P's are quite good!
-
As for Radiant being 60 DP. It is stronger than Paragon, but it is an SNK boss ship that requires top Tech skills to unlock. If it had to compete with +1 s-mod like today, I still think 40 DP is fine where it is at because it is the only thing keeping me from not getting Spec.Mods (which is also overpowered if fully exploited, especially on phase ships), and the other Remnant ships generally being too weak to justify Automated Ships.
This logic is completely backwards. You don't balance the ships to fit the arbitrarily balanced skills, you balance the ships to be balanced independently, and then balance skills to work with the ships.
-
Generally speaking if Fury costed 20 DP with no other changes then I think it'd probably be fine. Testing against Ordos fleets it always does more damage than the Falcon or the Falcon P, although I readily admit that depends on the particular loadout of each ship. The Falcon P does somewhat more than the Falcon but not significantly more, so maybe I'm using too niche of a loadout or testing situation, but I don't see it being worth 20 DP. Maybe 17 DP or something. Being able to equip 4 medium missiles is very strong though.
The Fury is fast, with good flux, and has 360 degree shields, so it's a pretty good brawler, a scaled-down version of the Aurora. I find the 360 degree shields to be important, because Falcons (and Medusas) seem to always be taking beams and projectiles up their...engines a lot, and then dying. So the Fury is a lot more "fault tolerant", especially when used by the AI because the AI makes a lot of mistakes.
I tested 4 Furies, 4 Falcon P's, and 4 Falcons against my 2-Ordos (including 7 Radiants) test fleet. I myself piloted a Doom but tried to stay back and observe for the most part, except if a ship got in trouble. I deploy the entire fleet together, move them all to a spot in front of the main enemy fleet, and then set full assault on. All officers are reckless. The loadout was:
Fury: 2 sabot pods, cryoblaster, minipulser, IR pulse laser, Xyphos; expanded missile racks, hardened shields, integrated targeting unit, converted hangar, solar shielding, front shield conversion, 14 cap, 0 vent; target analysis, missile specialization, reliability engineering, shield modulation, energy weapon mastery (elite)
Falcon P: 3 sabot pods, assault chaingun, antimatter SRM missile, breach SRM, Xyphos; expanded missile racks, hardened shields, integrated targeting unit, converted hangar, solar shielding, 26 cap, 2 vent; target analysis (elite), missile specialization, reliability engineering, shield modulation, gunnery implants
Falcon: 2 heavy machine guns, cryoblaster, antimatter SRM missile, Xyphos; hardened shields, integrated targeting unit, converted hangar, solar shielding, 26 cap, 24 vent; helmsmanship, shield modulation, reliability engineering, target analysis, and either energy weapon mastery (elite) or gunnery implants (in which case TA had elite), though that didn't seem to make much of a difference
From previous testing, Falcons using heavy machine guns were better than heavy needlers in this situation, since it ended up being a close-range shootout much of the time. I also used helmsmanship for Falcon because it needed that to be fast enough for this fight, otherwise it wastes time chasing down frigates and/or isn't able to back off quickly enough when it's in trouble. The others were fast enough without it (Falcon P has built-in unstable injector, of course).
The Falcon P can't use the cryoblaster, so it did less hull damage. The Falcon doesn't have sabot pods so it did less shield damage. Overall though the Fury beat out the other two in all 3 damage categories (shield, armor, hull). The Fury generally did roughly 30% or so more damage than the Falcon, though this varied each run. So it costing 20 DP seems about right. The Falcon P also getting boosted to 20 DP seems too high though, unless someone can give me a better loadout than what I got. (Same goes for the other ships, if someone can come up with a better loadout than what I'm using, since these may not be the most optimized loadouts possible.)
Attached is a screenshot with the results from one of the runs, although in this one the Fury did somewhat more damage than average. Thus far though what I'm seeing is Fury >> Falcon P > Falcon.
Yeah. While there were some counter builds that people came up with to specifically combat them for exhibition matches (Shield bypass (DR's version before the current patch) paragon was one!), Falcon P's with converted hangars + Omens came out of nowhere and dominated that tournament. The tournament rules prohibited the kind of sweeping and specialized builds that were needed to beat them so the eventual winner was a copycat whose Falcon P's + Omens were slightly better at killing Falcon P's + Omens than the original's.
Hmm can you give a link to the tournament? I only found the 11th shipbuilding fleet tournament which seems to be based on 0.9.1a and thus didn't have Furies.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
@Hiruma Kai
The Radiant change imo was a long time coming because any sane person saw it was way stronger than 40 DP, unless you think it's on par with the Conquest for example. But it was just an AI ship so I guess it wasn't urgent, now that the player can actually use it, it became more of an issue (and REDACTED fleets being stronger in this version was probably another piece of the puzzle).
Pirate Falcon is a tricky one because while it's just a variant of an existing ship, it's completely different from it and obviously more impactful, 4 medium missiles on a 15 DP veeeery fast ship is nuts. Now the reason why I don't have strong opinions is because I actually didn't use it that much, not a fan of missile spam playstyle personally. Played with it a bit as a playership on the version it came out but eventually swapped for something bigger. I honestly couldn't tell you what DP cost I would propose since I'm not that familiar but obviously not 15 DP, as we can see from various tests and tournaments.
Great point about DP costs meaning jack *** in early game, hell I'd pilot a Fury for 25 DP if I can't find anything else. But the reason for my post was precisely the large battles where you carefully have to pick your ships. I had 3 Furies in my fleet, and every tougher fight at least 1-2 would die. They just seem super expendable when the smaller cheaper ships would far outlive them. Eventually I ditched all buy the last Fury which I sometimes used in pursuits, and my fleet was doing better, with less casualties. Now obviously this is just from one playthrough so my opinion my change a bit, but I seriously doubt I'll be using Furies in late game if they cost 20 DP and keep the squishiness they have now.
I know how speed is super important in this game trust me, but I feel like people are overrating it a bit. Who cares if I have a lightning fast cruiser with good weapons when I can have a solid ship that can protect itself easily while having even better weapons. Maybe I just dislike Plasma burn ships because they let me down so much. I'll probably stick to Champions and Dominators if Fury gets a 5 DP bump, at least those ships won't die to a random destroyer.
-
As for Radiant being 60 DP. It is stronger than Paragon, but it is an SNK boss ship that requires top Tech skills to unlock. If it had to compete with +1 s-mod like today, I still think 40 DP is fine where it is at because it is the only thing keeping me from not getting Spec.Mods (which is also overpowered if fully exploited, especially on phase ships), and the other Remnant ships generally being too weak to justify Automated Ships.
This logic is completely backwards. You don't balance the ships to fit the arbitrarily balanced skills, you balance the ships to be balanced independently, and then balance skills to work with the ships.
NPC-only ships do not necessarily need to be balanced the same way as playerships. Remnants appear to be an attempt at a deliberately overpowered and unfair SNK boss faction. (in terms of fighting games, those endgame opponents with totally unfair moves, 1HKO or 2HKOs, infinite combos, immunity to flinching or sweeping, breaks the normal rules, etc.) Without Automated Ships, player cannot use them at all. Automated Ships is a high-tier Tech skill, not something the player can get just by dipping one or two points in Tech. If player wants to use those NPC ships, he needs to sink points in Tech.
With that said, the Remnant ships smaller than Radiant are comparable to the good human ships. Not very intimidating for a boss faction. Automated Ships are a waste on those ships (except maybe frigate spam). Radiant is the only ship that makes Automated Ships worthwhile enough to take instead of Special Modifications.
@Hiruma Kai
The Radiant change imo was a long time coming because any sane person saw it was way stronger than 40 DP, unless you think it's on par with the Conquest for example. But it was just an AI ship so I guess it wasn't urgent, not that the player can actually use it, it became more of an issue (and REDACTED fleets being stronger in this version was probably another piece of the puzzle).
If Radiant was a normal human ship, I would agree that 40 is criminally low. But as a normally unplayable SNK boss, less DP cost is part of the perks of being an unfair opponent player normally cannot use.
Some games have easter eggs that make them playable and may try to nerf them.
-
I know how speed is super important in this game trust me, but I feel like people are overrating it a bit. Who cares if I have a lightning fast cruiser with good weapons when I can have a solid ship that can protect itself easily while having even better weapons. Maybe I just dislike Plasma burn ships because they let me down so much. I'll probably stick to Champions and Dominators if Fury gets a 5 DP bump, at least those ships won't die to a random destroyer.
This is true to but one reason the Radiant is more terrifying than the Paragon isn't its firepower (which isn't that much greater), it's that it's a battleship that can keep up with Frigates. The speed of the Radiant is its greatest asset, even more so than the brutal forward-facing firepower or impressive flux stats. Give it High Energy Focus instead and it becomes an Energy Onslaught that would be powerful, sure, but nowhere near as terrifying than it jumping in point blank-after your cruisers. You could easily disengage from it or flank it. That's where speed becomes most advantageous: not in closing the distance but in the pursuit and the getaway. Just take a loot at the Odyssey pre-Plasma Jets: it had HEF but it was considered sub-par.
-
But the Radiant doesn't have only speed, it has mobility in ALL directions, meaning it can just blink away and reset its flux. Plasma burn ships can't do that.
If I'm remembering things right Odyssey got a ton of other changes which made it a great player ship. Massive boost to general top speed, large energy on the side to large synergy, extra fighter bay? but it also got its shields nerfed. Old Odyssey was just too boring and a hassle to pilot.
-
This is true to but one reason the Radiant is more terrifying than the Paragon isn't its firepower (which isn't that much greater), it's that it's a battleship that can keep up with Frigates. The speed of the Radiant is its greatest asset, even more so than the brutal forward-facing firepower or impressive flux stats. Give it High Energy Focus instead and it becomes an Energy Onslaught that would be powerful, sure, but nowhere near as terrifying than it jumping in point blank-after your cruisers. You could easily disengage from it or flank it. That's where speed becomes most advantageous: not in closing the distance but in the pursuit and the getaway. Just take a loot at the Odyssey pre-Plasma Jets: it had HEF but it was considered sub-par.
Also for escaping when losing the flux war. I could not count how many times Radiant skimmed and escaped my Paragon with four autopulse or two plasma cannons only without taking significant damage. This is why I put Tachyon Lances in the turrets (to back up two plasma hardpoints) so that if Radiant tries to skim away from the plasma barrage, it gets sniped by lances.
Radiant can comfortably support three plasma cannons. And back those up with either missiles or Paladin PD. Thanks to Radiant's skimmer, it can get away with leaving more (smaller) mounts empty because it can skim to reorient its facing.
If I'm remembering things right Odyssey got a ton of other changes which made it a great player ship. Massive boost to general top speed, large energy on the side to large synergy, extra fighter bay? but it also got its shields nerfed. Old Odyssey was just too boring and a hassle to pilot.
Old Odyssey was the only capital that was less than battleship strength after Conquest was buffed in 0.8a. Its only strength was exploiting Tachyon Lance cheese while constantly backpedaling, (which the AI could do well enough in one-on-one duel, but was distracted by multiple opponents). It was a player-only ship that was inferior to other capitals.
-
Great point about DP costs meaning jack *** in early game, hell I'd pilot a Fury for 25 DP if I can't find anything else. But the reason for my post was precisely the large battles where you carefully have to pick your ships. I had 3 Furies in my fleet, and every tougher fight at least 1-2 would die. They just seem super expendable when the smaller cheaper ships would far outlive them. Eventually I ditched all buy the last Fury which I sometimes used in pursuits, and my fleet was doing better, with less casualties.
Interesting. I eventually ditched all the smaller ships, because Fury was more than capable of dealing with small ships, while possessing some survivability against bigger ones. I still lose some from time to time, but I doubt many fleet comps could fight Remnants without sustaining losses sometimes.
If Radiant was a normal human ship, I would agree that 40 is criminally low. But as a normally unplayable SNK boss, less DP cost is part of the perks of being an unfair opponent player normally cannot use.
Remnant ships being undercosted was fine, when you could outnumber them with just ships, but is less so now. Bringing equivalent officer force is no small feat. Player gets hit with two disadvantages at the same time.
-
Remnant ships being undercosted was fine, when you could outnumber them with just ships, but is less so now. Bringing equivalent officer force is no small feat. Player gets hit with two disadvantages at the same time.
Right, I didn't think Ordos were that hard in .091. The skill changes and metagame moves that shifted a lot onto officers gave Ordos a ton of advantages that the player can't match. Radiants being 40 DP in .091 really wasn't that big of deal. They were strong, sure, but the 40 DP wasn't an issue because you could still steamroll the rest of the Ordo fleet. Now, Alpha-Core'd Brilliants are no slouches and you're almost always out-ranged due to electronic warfare.
Radiants being 60 in the new Ordos should help. 1 Radiant is manageable but 2 is tough sledding. It's possible but as we've all been talking about, Radiants can escape pretty well too and even if you get one out of position, it's not that way for long.
-
Remnant ships being undercosted was fine, when you could outnumber them with just ships, but is less so now. Bringing equivalent officer force is no small feat. Player gets hit with two disadvantages at the same time.
I am not fond of officer spam. I think mercs were the gateway to allow officers on most or all ships in any endgame NPC fleet, and I wish mercs were removed from the game just like clips for ballistics, just so endgame fleets cannot spam officers on every ship because mercs are plausible deniability. (Or at least, limit mercs to two in a fleet and do not allow any fleet get more mercs than that.) Player needs to bleed story points AND money to support mercs. I did not have unlimited money when I first made it to endgame in my last game. Meanwhile, NPC fleets have unlimited resources and do not care about money and story points, or time wasted searching markets for mercs.
With Remnants spamming officers, I do not bother trying to keep up with either DP or ECM.
-
As for Radiant being 60 DP. It is stronger than Paragon, but it is an SNK boss ship that requires top Tech skills to unlock. If it had to compete with +1 s-mod like today, I still think 40 DP is fine where it is at because it is the only thing keeping me from not getting Spec.Mods (which is also overpowered if fully exploited, especially on phase ships), and the other Remnant ships generally being too weak to justify Automated Ships.
This logic is completely backwards. You don't balance the ships to fit the arbitrarily balanced skills, you balance the ships to be balanced independently, and then balance skills to work with the ships.
NPC-only ships do not necessarily need to be balanced the same way as playerships. Remnants appear to be an attempt at a deliberately overpowered and unfair SNK boss faction. (in terms of fighting games, those endgame opponents with totally unfair moves, 1HKO or 2HKOs, infinite combos, immunity to flinching or sweeping, breaks the normal rules, etc.) Without Automated Ships, player cannot use them at all. Automated Ships is a high-tier Tech skill, not something the player can get just by dipping one or two points in Tech. If player wants to use those NPC ships, he needs to sink points in Tech.
With that said, the Remnant ships smaller than Radiant are comparable to the good human ships. Not very intimidating for a boss faction. Automated Ships are a waste on those ships (except maybe frigate spam). Radiant is the only ship that makes Automated Ships worthwhile enough to take instead of Special Modifications.
My point is that the automated ships skill can be arbitrarily balanced. It has no effect on the game outside of its direct effects. Radiant DP is not arbitrary because it appears in enemy fleets as well as in the automated ships skill. It doesn't make any sense to balance the radiant DP around the skill when changing DP has lots of other effects. You should first balance radiant DP to make enemy fleets appropriately difficult, and then balance automated ships to work with the balanced radiant DP. Not the other way around.
-
Unpopular opinion: I think Apogees are actually priced ok at 18 because they aren't that good. They combine being slow with being short ranged so can't deal with asymmetric situations, and their enormous shield radius makes so they block allies from firing. The large missile is quite good and the large energy is potentially good for things that come to it, but they are extremely easy to lose in hard fights because of their lack of mobility. I've found them to be more liability than asset.
I'd be ok with Furies at 20 and Apogees at 18 because Furies are better!
Agreed, Apogees get mopped up by redacted, urging the player to replace them with something more capable making the 18 DP argument pointless.
Also don't forget that they are big, easy targets.
-
I think most of the power comes from the Fury's absurd tankiness. Its Flux capacity and probably Armor are imo too high.
And a large part of it is also the Shield Conversion - Front hullmod, wich is frankly overpowered. Does it really need to give you Extended Shields, Accelerated Shields AND Stabilized Shields all wrapped in one cheap hullmod, with little drawback ?
I'd much rather have a Fury for 15 DP thats a scaled up Shrike with a focus on speed and offensive than a scaled down Aurora for 20 DP with focus on relative tankiness.
The later doesn't really fit the lore of the ship.
And there is a tanky high-tech ship with 360° shields in the 20 DP range already with the Apogee.