Fractal Softworks Forum

Starsector => General Discussion => Blog Posts => Topic started by: Alex on March 18, 2022, 09:32:42 AM

Title: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 18, 2022, 09:32:42 AM
Blog post here (https://fractalsoftworks.com/2022/03/18/uniquifying-the-factions-part-1/).
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Timid on March 18, 2022, 09:45:16 AM
Hopefully for part 2, the League get their own cool music theme.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 18, 2022, 09:54:00 AM
70 base speed """""low-tech""""" capitals with a better plasma burn? 10k armor? The powercreep is real, high-tech forever worst tech.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Farya on March 18, 2022, 10:00:44 AM
Orion drive sounds like something pathers would like to temper with. They would get their own variants of church ships, right? I could really see pathers repurpousing Orion Drive into an orbital bombardment weapon of sorts.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 18, 2022, 10:01:47 AM
What is the max crew of Invictus?  Even with a skeleton crew of 4000, this would be useful as a colony ship to transport a huge population at once.  If the difference between maximum crew and skeleton crew of Invictus is significantly more than Onslaught or Legion, then it can be even useful as a troop transport.  I already use Onslaught and Legion at times as raider ships because they can haul many marines with their excess personnel capacity.  More convenient than hauling a bunch of Starliners and Nebulas.

Retribution with its Orion Device reminds me of an egg-laying bug.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: AcaMetis on March 18, 2022, 10:05:08 AM
Not going to lie, already looking forward to the mods that are going to add pather/pirate variants of these crazy behemoths.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Thaago on March 18, 2022, 10:17:11 AM
70 base speed """""low-tech""""" capitals with a better plasma burn? 10k armor? The powercreep is real, high-tech forever worst tech.

You uhh might want to actually read the blog post! Its 10k armor, but only counts as 1k for reduction purposes, so the whole lineup of effective high shot size weaponry we currently have will be able to chew through it the same way they chew through an Eagle, only taking 10x longer. 10k is a lot but without the damage reduction it doesn't make weapons obsolete, and its not so much compared to the amount of damage that a capital shield can tank. For the battlecruiser, it only has 800 armor and a 1.2 shield! Its flux stats are probably good, but this thing is looking like an extreme glass cannon for a capital. Its like a big Eradicator... that is much easier to kill!
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 18, 2022, 10:24:51 AM
Orion drive sounds like something pathers would like to temper with.

It does, doesn't it? :-X


What is the max crew of Invictus?  Even with a skeleton crew of 4000, this would be useful as a colony ship to transport a huge population at once.  If the difference between maximum crew and skeleton crew of Invictus is significantly more than Onslaught or Legion, then it can be even useful as a troop transport.  I already use Onslaught and Legion at times as raider ships because they can haul many marines with their excess personnel capacity.  More convenient than hauling a bunch of Starliners and Nebulas.

It's currently 6k, so yeah, you could totally do that.


Not going to lie, already looking forward to the mods that are going to add pather/pirate variants of these crazy behemoths.

(Depending on how a few things shake out, you might not have to.)


For the battlecruiser, it only has 800 armor and a 1.2 shield! Its flux stats are probably good, but this thing is looking like an extreme glass cannon for a capital. Its like a big Eradicator... that is much easier to kill!

It does have good flux stats! Still looking a bit at its balance, though. But the main thing to keep in mind for it is it has Distributed Fire Control - meaning, *no ITU or DTC*.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: SCC on March 18, 2022, 10:26:57 AM
Alex, you were meant to bring balance to fleet compositions, not fill them with capital ships!
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 18, 2022, 10:28:25 AM
If there are as many frigates as there are capital ships, that seems pretty balanced, no?

(I know you're joking, but I'm not actually sure what you mean. Just "counts of ships of a given type, that exist", right? Not "fleet compositions"?)
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 18, 2022, 10:29:22 AM
It's still a capital that gains +500 armor from the hullmod if you want to. And gauss cannons without ITU are longer range than 700 range large energies with capital ITU, not to mention better scaling with officer skills.

Retribution looks like it can support triple gauss with its flux stats, and SIX harpoon pods on top of that. While being faster than Odyssey.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: SCC on March 18, 2022, 10:35:17 AM
(Depending on how a few things shake out, you might not have to.)
I wish for more high-tech or midline pirate ships.
If there are as many frigates as there are capital ships, that seems pretty balanced, no?

(I know you're joking, but I'm not actually sure what you mean. Just "counts of ships of a given type, that exist", right? Not "fleet compositions"?)
Adding 3 new capital ships in a single update looks a bit like giving up on preventing capital spam.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 18, 2022, 10:39:37 AM
Maaaan I'm so happy we're getting new capitals to make everything feel cool in their own way. That said, a ship with 4 built in hullmods dayuum, you'll need 5 minutes just to understand how the ship even works. Everything that's been shown so far I'm really content with, honestly have zero criticism except pls don't have us wait too long for part 2  :'(

Can't wait to see how the other factions became more unique (I'd guess all those missiles teased before play a role hmm).
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Rain on March 18, 2022, 10:42:23 AM
Interesting. I'd always liked the feel of the Sector as a place where people are mostly 'stuck with what they've got', and so while I'm a fan of faction mods, the way they often come with whole fleets worth of custom ships quite swiftly makes the game feel really bloated for me; this 'compromise' of emphasizing different capitals with a pool of 'what you got' around it plus specific weapon picks seems like a neat direction. Tweaking faction files towards this standard may be more work for me to tailor the game to my liking but it's a nifty sort of standard idea to work around.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 18, 2022, 10:42:36 AM
Can't wait to see how the other factions became more unique (I'd guess all those missiles teased before play a role hmm).
This blog post mentions factions having exclusive access to high-powered weapons, guess League is going to be the missile spam faction. They are getting a missile capital and a midline (?) missile destroyer.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 18, 2022, 10:47:05 AM
Adding 3 new capital ships in a single update looks a bit like giving up on preventing capital spam.

The two seem completely unrelated, no? One is how many ships of a given type exist, and the other is how many ships of a given type are in a specific fleet.

Retribution looks like it can support triple gauss with its flux stats, and SIX harpoon pods on top of that. While being faster than Odyssey.

While moving forward, yeah, it's faster. Still, it's entirely possible the Retribution is overtuned right now; it's something I'm keeping an eye on. So far in testing I haven't been doing better with it as the flagship compared to using an Odyssey, but, yeah, keeping all this in mind.


Maaaan I'm so happy we're getting new capitals to make everything feel cool in their own way. That said, a ship with 4 built in hullmods dayuum, you'll need 5 minutes just to understand how the ship even works. Everything that's been shown so far I'm really content with, honestly have zero criticism except pls don't have us wait too long for part 2  :'(

*thumbs up*

And, yeah - in general I *try* to keep the number of built-ins down, but the Invictus is just so much its own thing that it felt like it really needed all of them.

Can't wait to see how the other factions became more unique (I'd guess all those missiles teased before play a role hmm).

You bet!

Interesting. I'd always liked the feel of the Sector as a place where people are mostly 'stuck with what they've got', and so while I'm a fan of faction mods, the way they often come with whole fleets worth of custom ships quite swiftly makes the game feel really bloated for me; this 'compromise' of emphasizing different capitals with a pool of 'what you got' around it plus specific weapon picks seems like a neat direction. Tweaking faction files towards this standard may be more work for me to tailor the game to my liking but it's a nifty sort of standard idea to work around.

Cool, I'm glad you like the approach! More or less on the same page here, at least as far as vanilla feel - though I certainly do understand why someone making a mod would go for a specific feel and a complete ship line-up, and there's all sorts of ways to justify it in-fiction.

... and a midline (?) missile destroyer.

Hmm?
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 18, 2022, 10:49:16 AM
Did David trick me? He posted an emoji in a large missile destroyer speculation thread once. My heart is shattered, how could he do it.  :'(
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Destructively Phased on March 18, 2022, 10:52:11 AM
With a new battle cruiser, any chance you could review the accessibility of the odyssey? It’s always been a hard to acquire ship, being the only capital ship that can be hard to acquire for a player for who credits and lost ships aren’t a concern. As unlike the other 5 capitals (sorry atlas and Prometheus MK2) that appear in the game right now, the odyssey doesn’t spawn in faction bounty fleets, doesn’t appear in major markets and I know of only one fixed spawn, the bounty fleets protecting the tri-tach planet during the storyline quest.

This leaves the only ways I know of to get an odyssey reliably (as in get a replacement if you get it blown up) to either get lucky exploring or using the historian, or grind a ridiculously high relationship with a Diktat official and get one built (though you’ll be looking at a relationship of close to 100 and priority contact for the price to drop to the point where it’s within the amount your permitted to spend). Or raid planets.

The odyssey appearing more often would be nice to see, since it’s a fun capital to fly and with its stats it works as a good flagship for a high-risk exploration fleet. Maybe it could work for exceptionally large AI exploration and salvage fleets, or the Tri-Tach as a flagship for forces that need a capital class flagship but don’t need a battleship or carrier?

Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 18, 2022, 10:54:29 AM
Did David trick me? He posted an emoji in a large missile destroyer speculation thread once. My heart is shattered, how could he do it.  :'(

Ahhhh - there's something behind that, indeed, but your speculation has taken you down the wrong path :)

With a new battle cruiser, any chance you could review the accessibility of the odyssey? It’s always been a hard to acquire ship, being the only capital ship that can be hard to acquire for a player for who credits and lost ships aren’t a concern.

This is getting a bit into "part 2" territory, but yeah, it should become easier to get!
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Wyvern on March 18, 2022, 11:16:46 AM
Did David trick me? He posted an emoji in a large missile destroyer speculation thread once. My heart is shattered, how could he do it.  :'(

Ahhhh - there's something behind that, indeed, but your speculation has taken you down the wrong path :)
Hm... Clearly the answer is synergy-type weapons? You don't need a separate hull for a large missile destroyer if you can just put your large missiles on a Sunder!
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 18, 2022, 11:34:37 AM
For the battlecruiser, it only has 800 armor and a 1.2 shield! Its flux stats are probably good, but this thing is looking like an extreme glass cannon for a capital. Its like a big Eradicator... that is much easier to kill!
It also has that new built-in Distributed Fire Control that prevents DTC/ITU.  It will trade shot range for weapon durability, and it will have likely have less range than a heavy energy weapon with ITU.  Basically, a high-tech ship in low-tech clothing.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 18, 2022, 11:41:37 AM
It also has that new built-in Distributed Fire Control that prevents DTC/ITU.  It will trade shot range for weapon durability, and it will have likely have less range than a heavy energy weapon with ITU.  Basically, a high-tech ship in low-tech clothing.

A heavy energy weapon (plasma, autopulse) with capital-grade ITU and gunnery implants is 1225 range.

A mauler/HVD with just gunnery and ballistic mastery is 1250 range.
A gauss with gunnery and ballistic mastery is 1500 range.

A normal small/medium ballistic with a rangefinder and both skills is 1125. Not exactly "short range" either, it's only 100 range less than the high-tech.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 18, 2022, 11:58:29 AM
A heavy energy weapon (plasma, autopulse) with capital-grade ITU and gunnery implants is 1225 range.

A mauler/HVD with just gunnery and ballistic mastery is 1250 range.
A gauss with gunnery and ballistic mastery is 1500 range.

A normal small/medium ballistic with a rangefinder and both skills is 1125. Not exactly "short range" either, it's only 100 range less than the high-tech.
Gauss is an obvious exception, but it is also the most inefficient ballistic weapon, and it shoots slowly (not good against nimble hordes).

I did not include skills because not everyone will have the skills, like unofficered ships or ships with low-level officers and few skills.  I had unskilled ships with only hullmods available in mind.

So, 700 +60% is 1120.  900 without any extra range is 900.  The ship needs Gauss Cannons to exceed capital ITU boosted heavy energy weapons.  Also, cruiser heavy energy ITU is 980, so Retribution needs at least HVD/Mauler to barely exceed that.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Bastion.Systems on March 18, 2022, 12:22:41 PM
Neat, Retribution is a delightfully orkish ship.
I am interested what you will do with the League and the Diktat.
My main problem with League is that Thule is a very boring system, both visually and by the lack of markets and long in-system travel times.
Kazeron also does not really look like it could support size 7 population.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Botaragno on March 18, 2022, 12:40:17 PM
MMMmmmmmmm delicious Luddic church content mmmm Yummy

Now how do we spice up the Indie and Sindrian faction rosters I wonder.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 18, 2022, 01:02:25 PM
Oh I actually forgot to ask something important, can we know the DP costs for these capitals? They both seem quite scary but with such glaring weaknesses I doubt they're expensive. Invictus probably doesn't cost more than a Paragon and Retribution could be anywhere between 35-45 for all I know, there's still a few unknown factors.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 18, 2022, 01:17:57 PM
Oh I actually forgot to ask something important, can we know the DP costs for these capitals? They both seem quite scary but with such glaring weaknesses I doubt they're expensive. Invictus probably doesn't cost more than a Paragon and Retribution could be anywhere between 35-45 for all I know, there's still a few unknown factors.

The Invictus is 60, the Retribution is currently 35 - but, again, the actual balance of the Retribution is... not fully coalesced, let's say. I could see it's DP going up a bit (though I'd prefer to keep it), or perhaps its flux stats getting downgraded some; we'll see. I really just need to do more testing - it both feels "too good" offhand but also did not seem to outperform the Odyssey, so I need to figure out which it *actually* is.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Satirical on March 18, 2022, 01:26:10 PM
I really like the hegemony auxiliary ships and wished there were more for hegemony lol like the mule or venture or even the tankers like dram and nebula lol.

- on another note I wonder if Sindrian Diktat will get unique auxiliary ships too, such as bringing back the old Gemini (without civilian class hull) or drover in Diktat colors but i guess this update is focused on capitals :)
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: FooF on March 18, 2022, 01:50:13 PM
Super cool blogpost and the fleets having much more-clearly defined “profiles” (literally) is a huge step in the right direction.

I wasn’t expecting the Retribution at all so color me pleasantly surprised. “Orkish” (Warhammer 40k) as has been previously described, was exactly my thought. More dakka and painted red. I kid you not, an SO Pather variant needs to exist and it needs to have potentially disastrous effects on the Orion Device mid-battle.

As for the Invictus, I was very curious how the LiDAR and Armor mechanics were going to work (along with DP cost) so I’m glad you clarified. At 60 DP, I’m curious if the Invictus is supposed to challenge a Paragon outright (or an Onslaught for that matter) or if it’s more akin to a siege weapon that ultimately doesn’t want to be be out front trading fire with other capitals. Phase Ships will be the bane of its existence.

Edit: the OCD in me is asking why both large missiles are on the same side versus a more aesthetically pleasing symmetrical design. Just saying…

All told, this was not the blog post I was expecting but the one I needed. New ships always are exciting and knowing the other factions are getting love makes me happy. I look forward to the unique super-battleship Lion of Sindria.  ;D
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: woodsmoke on March 18, 2022, 01:52:19 PM
First time on the forums in nearly five and a half years and the first post I see is my greenskins finally getting the love they so richly deserve.

Ludd Vult!
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Blake81 on March 18, 2022, 03:14:10 PM
I'll say, I really like the way this update is looking; not only the different ship makes everything more unique, but it also makes it fun to hunt for specific ship loadouts/variants for your own fleet.

That said, if I were to request something, I would ask for every faction to have their own variant of the more "Commonplace" ships, and more importantly, for them to be different beyond just the color scheme. The Buffalo (normal, not Mk.II) comes to mind; IIRC, everyone (but the Perseans) has their own, but only the Hegemony one has different stats, and the Pirate variant which had Shielded Holds. All others are just paintjobs. I'd be great if they all had slightly different stats, or even quirks of their own, which reflected what that faction's about (Just like the shielded pirate variant).

Also, I really like the looks of the Invictus; it's blocky shape gives it an oddly Sovietic feel; very utilitarian-looking.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: bowman on March 18, 2022, 04:39:28 PM
Loving it! Didn't read closely and thought the midline that was teased a bit ago was a cruiser but checked and it's a capital. Loved the Invictus since I first saw its sprite and the Retribution is hilarious- clever idea to make use of the good 'ol nuclear pulse drive. Extremely fitting for LC and a low-tech battlecruiser, indeed.

One concerning thing I noticed though- does Invictus really have 40,000 hull? That seems a little.. extreme. Even with its armor being less effective, that means it nominally has around 45,000 health to chew through which might be kind of reasonable with the perspective of shields being filled and dissipating over a battle but I'm really not sure it'd be fun to sit and shoot it for that long. The other concerning thing about this is hullmods that boost hull HP. If you stack Reinforced Bulkheads on that then it's +40%, and then I can't remember what but there's one that's +20% as well if I recall right. So you can get it to a hefty 64,000 hull + 10,000 armor(at 10% DR effectiveness, admittedly) but that's still ~69,000 health even if you break the armor optimally. Maybe I'm underestimating the damage traded in the average battle but that seems awfully high.
 
For part 2, I hope we get more carrier option(s), since I still feel we're a little lacking in variety (particularly for destroyer and capital tier carriers) Don't get me wrong, we do have a good few but destroyer-tier carriers feel like "do I want the 2 (bad*) civilian ones, or do I want the military one that is kind of ok?" (or do I want the remnant one which doesn't have enough LPC options to meaningfully field, and man I wish it did I love that lil ship). The Legion vs Astral is a much better choice but it feels like there's a gulf between them given how polar-opposite their use cases are (and the Legion doesn't have a carrier system). Which, speaking of carrier systems, if we list out our options:
Other System: Legion, Condor, Mora
Carrier-Centric: Astral, Heron, Drover, Scintilla*, Gemini*
*Scintilla, as mentioned, doesn't currently have enough Drone LPC types to really be fieldable (no kinetic option, only one ~high tech pirahna~ bomber)
*Gemini doesn't really count given it only has 1 bay and the same system as Drover along with worse everything else (because it's civilian, which is fine)
Non carrier-centric systems aren't a requirement but it does lend the ships to being not quite true carriers- it means some of their cost budget is in something else. This is fine, and I love the Legion and Mora both, but it still leaves us (at least to me) with what feels like lacking options for just fielding more fighters. It also, to an extent, leaves us with one option for really fielding bombers at the cruiser level: the heron (because of targeting feed). As well as one for fielding them at the destroyer level: the Drover. If you want your fighters to actually be the ship's primary strength, it ends up boiling down to those, at least in my experience. (Also: please just make all the straight dmg+ skills apply to fighters, as it stands their power goes down over the course of a campaign because captains get all these armor+, dmg- skills for their ship and you get dmg+, hit str+ for weapons to compensate but fighters don't so they just deal less. Oh, and they die faster, because larger battles- and because the only skill affecting them makes them able to kill each other faster, and lets ships kill them faster)

But I digress- this isn't a suggestions page. Part 2 and the hopes I have regarding all the new energy munitions(new LPCs?) got me thinking and if I can make my voice heard then I'd like to try.
No matter what, I look forward to what's in store :D
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: SonnaBanana on March 18, 2022, 05:04:52 PM
Alex, have there been any changes to Neural Link qnd Cybernetic Augmentation?
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: CrashToDesktop on March 18, 2022, 05:13:14 PM
Carrier-Centric: Astral, Heron, Drover, Scintilla*, Gemini*
*Gemini doesn't really count given it only has 1 bay and the same system as Drover along with worse everything else (because it's civilian, which is fine)
Speaking of the Gemini, I believe Alex has some potential changes (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=23823.msg354921#msg354921) for it in the pipeline. Not particularly specific, just "remove civgrade" and "make it better for combat", but there's the potential for it to become interesting.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Cycerin on March 18, 2022, 05:27:24 PM
Have to say I didnt expect to see something as insanely "low tech" as an orion drive in Starsector but now that it's here I gotta say you made it really cool (and made it feel like it makes sense, to boot) - awesome work
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: RustyCabbage on March 18, 2022, 05:46:55 PM
The ships look sweet! Glad to see more faction diversification too. Hopefully this means we'll have more uniqueness for our mid-line factions coming up as well. Couple comments on the numbers:

1. Does Heavy Armor still only increase the Invictus's armor by 500? My only issue with the Ablative armor hullmod is that it seems like it will play very poorly with flat armor increases and runs counter to how armor has worked for every other ship. I'm a little hesitant to bring up mod content, but Dark.Revenant's Interstellar Imperium accomplishes something similar to ablative armor (although nowhere near the same degree) by having a reasonable base armor and applying a modifyMult (and then of course reducing the armor strength for damage reduction proportionally). Food for thought if it isn't already the case I guess.

2. 10 large ballistic weapons with 600 base flux seems... unfortunate. I guess it is unshielded, but when the system is activated triple fire rate means 12 larges worth of flux generation (unless like Accelerated Ammo Feeder it comes with a flux reduction? One can hope, but I don't see it in the status messages). I get the idea that it's supposed to be relatively benign except for dangerous bursts of activity, but it seems a bit crippled here, especially since its low OP makes Flux Distributor or even Resistant Flux Conduits probably unattractive. 18 second vent time at max flux is twice as much as any other ship currently in the game, which gives me the impression that in long or hard fights this ship will at some point just ramp up its flux and refuse to vent, firing its weapons only piecemeal until it's worn down and destroyed. Couple that with a somewhat egregious 40000 hull (which I'm sure will also get Blast Doors and Reinforced Bulkheads)... I'd love to be told I'm wrong. It's just kind of weird given it comes alongside the Retribution with its possibly ridiculous 900 base flux (I guess it seems fragile enough to deserve it?).

(On the other hand, 12 ballistic larges at Paragon range :o could be I'm doomsaying too early.)

3. 4000 skeleton crew, while very thematic, makes this ship seem like it will be hellish to maintain. More importantly, it seems like it will be essentially be unrecoverable without mothballing it and dragging it to a market (probably several), simply to restore its crew. Simply, it seems like its place in a player fleet will be more burdensome than productive, except perhaps as a glorified combat freighter/transport. Which would be a shame given it seems like it has a really cool design.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Histidine on March 18, 2022, 06:35:19 PM
>10k armor
"ALEX WHAT THE ***"
>reads next paragraph
"oh phew"

Nice, more differentiation on the menu for League!

3. 4000 skeleton crew, while very thematic, makes this ship seem like it will be hellish to maintain. More importantly, it seems like it will be essentially be unrecoverable without mothballing it and dragging it to a market (probably several), simply to restore its crew. Simply, it seems like its place in a player fleet will be more burdensome than productive, except perhaps as a glorified combat freighter/transport. Which would be a shame given it seems like it has a really cool design.
Yeah 4k sounds a bit screwy. At minimum it'll get Efficiency Overhaul installed straight off the bat, which brings crew requirement down to "only" 3200. Also don't get it disabled/destroyed in combat or you'll have to empty the Chicomoztoc open and black markets for replacement crew.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: ILuvLegion on March 18, 2022, 06:57:41 PM
I was looking closer at the example detachment for the Luddic church, and I didn’t recognize the last fighter (the one with six fighters in the wing). Is it new, or am I just forgetting one? If it is new, can you tell us anything about it Alex?
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 18, 2022, 07:18:26 PM
I really like the hegemony auxiliary ships and wished there were more for hegemony lol like the mule or venture or even the tankers like dram and nebula lol.

I could see that at some point! I enjoy the "Hegemony has auxiliaries filling in the low-end gaps" feel; just makes it feel more real somehow.


- on another note I wonder if Sindrian Diktat will get unique auxiliary ships too, such as bringing back the old Gemini (without civilian class hull) or drover in Diktat colors but i guess this update is focused on capitals :)

Not necessarily focused on capitals as much as capitals are an effective way to give a faction something that will represent it in the player's mind. But, yeah - the Diktat has some specific changes too, but, that's what part 2 is for :)


I wasn’t expecting the Retribution at all so color me pleasantly surprised. “Orkish” (Warhammer 40k) as has been previously described, was exactly my thought. More dakka and painted red. I kid you not, an SO Pather variant needs to exist and it needs to have potentially disastrous effects on the Orion Device mid-battle.

Hmm, I've got a note about a pirate version. For the Pathers, let's just say they did manage to get their hands on OD.


As for the Invictus, I was very curious how the LiDAR and Armor mechanics were going to work (along with DP cost) so I’m glad you clarified. At 60 DP, I’m curious if the Invictus is supposed to challenge a Paragon outright (or an Onslaught for that matter) or if it’s more akin to a siege weapon that ultimately doesn’t want to be be out front trading fire with other capitals. Phase Ships will be the bane of its existence.

1 vs 1 (which, very limited usefulness) it absolutely mauls an Onslaught, and loses quite cleanly to a Paragon - though you could probably? come up with a more specialized loadout where it doesn't - but still, by nature, a Paragon is a fairly hard counter. With something like 4x Gauss Cannon, it will successfully kite the Paragon, but the Paragon has plenty of time to vent in between barrages (and does so) so it's a stalemate. Which, I guess - more peak time on the Invictus, so it'd be a "win"... but 1 vs 1 is just not what you'd expect to see in actual use. I don't think phase ships hurt it more than other ships - it's not as susceptible to alpha strikes, so it'd probably be more hurt by flankers capable of putting out more sustained dps.


Edit: the OCD in me is asking why both large missiles are on the same side versus a more aesthetically pleasing symmetrical design. Just saying…

Hah - to me, having both missiles on the same side is *much more* aesthetically pleasing - and makes in-fiction design sense, too. You've got a missile battery there, as opposed to two separate launchers. It's also easier to see when/what it's firing, and there's a tactical wrinkle to it firing all missiles from one side.


First time on the forums in nearly five and a half years and the first post I see is my greenskins finally getting the love they so richly deserve.

Welcome back :)


I'll say, I really like the way this update is looking; not only the different ship makes everything more unique, but it also makes it fun to hunt for specific ship loadouts/variants for your own fleet.

Thank you!

That said, if I were to request something, I would ask for every faction to have their own variant of the more "Commonplace" ships, and more importantly, for them to be different beyond just the color scheme. The Buffalo (normal, not Mk.II) comes to mind; IIRC, everyone (but the Perseans) has their own, but only the Hegemony one has different stats, and the Pirate variant which had Shielded Holds. All others are just paintjobs. I'd be great if they all had slightly different stats, or even quirks of their own, which reflected what that faction's about (Just like the shielded pirate variant).

I want to be careful about adding too many of those "low impact" paintjob versions, even with minor mechanical differences. I don't think it's enough of an issue to remove existing ones - they're neat! - but if done too liberally, it's liable to become a bunch of clutter.

Loving it! Didn't read closely and thought the midline that was teased a bit ago was a cruiser but checked and it's a capital. Loved the Invictus since I first saw its sprite and the Retribution is hilarious- clever idea to make use of the good 'ol nuclear pulse drive. Extremely fitting for LC and a low-tech battlecruiser, indeed.

Thank you!

One concerning thing I noticed though- does Invictus really have 40,000 hull? That seems a little.. extreme. Even with its armor being less effective, that means it nominally has around 45,000 health to chew through which might be kind of reasonable with the perspective of shields being filled and dissipating over a battle but I'm really not sure it'd be fun to sit and shoot it for that long. The other concerning thing about this is hullmods that boost hull HP. If you stack Reinforced Bulkheads on that then it's +40%, and then I can't remember what but there's one that's +20% as well if I recall right. So you can get it to a hefty 64,000 hull + 10,000 armor(at 10% DR effectiveness, admittedly) but that's still ~69,000 health even if you break the armor optimally. Maybe I'm underestimating the damage traded in the average battle but that seems awfully high.

I get that, yeah - that was a concern of mine, too. I've played out a bunch of vs-Luddic-Church fights and it seems fine, though. It's really tough to put enough damage on it to kill it before everything around it is down, that's kind of the point. But more importantly, once it's alone, it goes down pretty fast - Ablative Armor really makes a difference there.

 

For part 2, I hope we get more carrier option(s),

...

But I digress- this isn't a suggestions page. Part 2 and the hopes I have regarding all the new energy munitions(new LPCs?) got me thinking and if I can make my voice heard then I'd like to try.
No matter what, I look forward to what's in store :D

I get what you're saying, and appreciate the suggestions! I feel like ultimately if you're not piloting a carrier, it's harder to make the system it has matter, so hybrid ships - with non-fighter-boosting systems, and some conventional capability - end up being more interesting. Yeah, there's not too many ways to get a bunch of fighters on the field - but if there were more ways, I'd like for them to be substantially different, otherwise it's still just... "more fighters on the field". There's room to do more stuff here, but it's also not something I'm particularly focused on, if we're being honest - and I don't think "really specializes in fighters" turns out to be all that interesting a faction identity; they seem more interesting to me as a way to spice things up, not the main course, if that makes sense. (I'm sure that there are perfectly good modded factions that *do* do this; this is just my perspecive on things in vanilla...)


Speaking of the Gemini, I believe Alex has some potential changes (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=23823.msg354921#msg354921) for it in the pipeline. Not particularly specific, just "remove civgrade" and "make it better for combat", but there's the potential for it to become interesting.

Thanks for the reminder! :)


Have to say I didnt expect to see something as insanely "low tech" as an orion drive in Starsector but now that it's here I gotta say you made it really cool (and made it feel like it makes sense, to boot) - awesome work

Hahah - thank you! I'm glad it feels like it makes sense, it's just so over the top but I *had to*.

1. Does Heavy Armor still only increase the Invictus's armor by 500? My only issue with the Ablative armor hullmod is that it seems like it will play very poorly with flat armor increases and runs counter to how armor has worked for every other ship. I'm a little hesitant to bring up mod content, but Dark.Revenant's Interstellar Imperium accomplishes something similar to ablative armor (although nowhere near the same degree) by having a reasonable base armor and applying a modifyMult (and then of course reducing the armor strength for damage reduction proportionally). Food for thought if it isn't already the case I guess.

Yeah, 500 from Heavy Armor. I think it makes sense; there's only so much more metal you can strap onto what's basically a chunk of metal. Gameplay-wise, I think it'd be fine either way - the ship has plenty of useful things to spend OP on so it's not like missing out on a "boost armor some more" option is going to hurt variety.

2. 10 large ballistic weapons with 600 base flux seems... unfortunate. I guess it is unshielded, but when the system is activated triple fire rate means 12 larges worth of flux generation (unless like Accelerated Ammo Feeder it comes with a flux reduction? One can hope, but I don't see it in the status messages). I get the idea that it's supposed to be relatively benign except for dangerous bursts of activity, but it seems a bit crippled here, especially since its low OP makes Flux Distributor or even Resistant Flux Conduits probably unattractive. 18 second vent time at max flux is twice as much as any other ship currently in the game, which gives me the impression that in long or hard fights this ship will at some point just ramp up its flux and refuse to vent, firing its weapons only piecemeal until it's worn down and destroyed. Couple that with a somewhat egregious 40000 hull (which I'm sure will also get Blast Doors and Reinforced Bulkheads)... I'd love to be told I'm wrong. It's just kind of weird given it comes alongside the Retribution with its possibly ridiculous 900 base flux (I guess it seems fragile enough to deserve it?).

That said, I haven't observed the ship get into much flux trouble - certainly not flux-lock itself; how much you invest in vents affects this a lot, of course. It's also much happier to vent while under fire due to its high hull and armor.

(On the other hand, 12 ballistic larges at Paragon range :o could be I'm doomsaying too early.)

It's only 4 ballistics at +100% range - just the hardpoints.


3. 4000 skeleton crew, while very thematic, makes this ship seem like it will be hellish to maintain. More importantly, it seems like it will be essentially be unrecoverable without mothballing it and dragging it to a market (probably several), simply to restore its crew. Simply, it seems like its place in a player fleet will be more burdensome than productive, except perhaps as a glorified combat freighter/transport. Which would be a shame given it seems like it has a really cool design.
Yeah 4k sounds a bit screwy. At minimum it'll get Efficiency Overhaul installed straight off the bat, which brings crew requirement down to "only" 3200. Also don't get it disabled/destroyed in combat or you'll have to empty the Chicomoztoc open and black markets for replacement crew.

I get the concern, but ... thematic! It's the ship with big numbers. We'll see, though.


>10k armor
"ALEX WHAT THE ***"
>reads next paragraph
"oh phew"

Yesss! It was totally intended to "get" the reader - at least, one that has an appreciation of what 10k armor means - so, glad it worked :)

I was looking closer at the example detachment for the Luddic church, and I didn’t recognize the last fighter (the one with six fighters in the wing). Is it new, or am I just forgetting one? If it is new, can you tell us anything about it Alex?

Ah - those are just the Shepherd's Borer drones :)
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: woodsmoke on March 18, 2022, 07:30:25 PM
The Buffalo (normal, not Mk.II) comes to mind; IIRC, everyone (but the Perseans) has their own, but only the Hegemony one has different stats, and the Pirate variant which had Shielded Holds. All others are just paintjobs. I'd be great if they all had slightly different stats, or even quirks of their own, which reflected what that faction's about (Just like the shielded pirate variant).

I don't recall seeing a Sindrian Buffalo variant, just Hegemony auxiliary and TT/LC paint jobs.

On that note, I don't think the LC should even be using the Buffalo, on account of it's tagged as a high tech hull. Granted, that designation doesn't really make sense; it's just an engine built onto a modular frame for attaching cargo containers. Same as the Atlas, just a lot smaller, but the Atlas is low tech.

Regardless, I think a better fit for the faction's theme and aesthetic is the Tarsus. This also dovetails nicely with the regular presence of Condors in Luddic fleets, given their propensity for adding modified flight decks to ships in order to field fighter complements. Taking excess or requisitioning Tarsus hulls from your trade fleets and converting them into Condors for carrier support in military actions is just taking that mentality to its logical conclusion.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Caymon Joestar on March 18, 2022, 07:31:50 PM
Looking at the battlecruiser, it doesn't really seem like a lowtech battlecruiser to me tbh.

Like Yeah, it clearly has a focus on speed but currently it feels like it's an oddy that trades the fighter bays for some more missiles and front facing larges but otherwise is like really really really similar in stats to the oddy as far as I tell from the screenshots in the post

Obviously, you're still finalizing stats and stuff so it can and prob will change between now and whenever you release it but things to maybe look at:

-800 armor vs oddy's 1000 (Doesnt really make sense at least to me since it's lowtech, it should have matching or even slightly better armor)

-900(?) Flux diss to oddy's 1000 (50% more diss over the onslaught seems like a bit overkill, 750 or 800 I think would be more in line while also allowing you to maybe give it better armor or shield speaking of shield

-Shields: While having a shield for it is nice and all, it feels like it's gonna be more of a liability with its current stats. Maybe it might be more interesting to give it a damper field right click instead? Would feel like a logical conclusion to the vanguard line if we ever get a damper field destroyer/cruiser.

-Speed: It seems to have a similar if not barely higher speed over the oddy? (70 vs 75? 73?) Feels weird to have something be on par with the tech that focuses on speed.

Sorry if it seems like backseating. I like it's design tho
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: SafariJohn on March 18, 2022, 07:42:02 PM
it's just an engine built onto a modular frame for attaching cargo containers. Same as the Atlas, just a lot smaller, but the Atlas is low tech.

If you look closely you will see the Buffalo has cargo doors, not detachable containers.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 18, 2022, 07:48:53 PM
On that note, I don't think the LC should even be using the Buffalo, on account of it's tagged as a high tech hull. Granted, that designation doesn't really make sense; it's just an engine built onto a modular frame for attaching cargo containers. Same as the Atlas, just a lot smaller, but the Atlas is low tech.

The Atlas is midline, btw. And fwiw, the LC will also have access to the Tarsus. I think the tech level itself isn't a good reason in-fiction to use or not use something; it's more about what the faction has access to. I think having that kind of variety and deviation from strict tech level adherence makes the factions feel better/more believable overall.

Looking at the battlecruiser, it doesn't really seem like a lowtech battlecruiser to me tbh.

Like Yeah, it clearly has a focus on speed but currently it feels like it's an oddy that trades the fighter bays for some more missiles and front facing larges but otherwise is like really really really similar in stats to the oddy as far as I tell from the screenshots in the post

Obviously, you're still finalizing stats and stuff so it can and prob will change between now and whenever you release it but things to maybe look at:

-800 armor vs oddy's 1000 (Doesnt really make sense at least to me since it's lowtech, it should have matching or even slightly better armor)

-900(?) Flux diss to oddy's 1000 (50% more diss over the onslaught seems like a bit overkill, 750 or 800 I think would be more in line while also allowing you to maybe give it better armor or shield speaking of shield

-Shields: While having a shield for it is nice and all, it feels like it's gonna be more of a liability with its current stats. Maybe it might be more interesting to give it a damper field right click instead? Would feel like a logical conclusion to the vanguard line if we ever get a damper field destroyer/cruiser.

-Speed: It seems to have a similar if not barely higher speed over the oddy? (70 vs 75? 73?) Feels weird to have something be on par with the tech that focuses on speed.

Sorry if it seems like backseating. I like it's design tho

Re: the flux dissipation, yeah, that's the stat I'm looking at as I pat the nerf bat, but again, we'll see.

I think... the way you're looking at it might perhaps be similar to the way I mentioned in the blog post as the way that leads to not being able to design a satisfactory low-tech battlecruiser :)

For example, the armor and the speed - yeah, I get what you're saying. But consider that the ship's designers simply made a harder tradeoff here - they took a lot more armor off, and squeezed more speed out of it. If you stick with "has to have more armor than a high-tech BC, has to have less speed than a high-tech BC" and so on, you constrain the design space so much that you get something less interesting. Fast low-tech ships already exist. Low-tech ships with very light armor already exist, too. The idea that low tech combat ships *must* have higher armor/be slower is a shackle of our own making - let go of it, and be free!

Having spent a bunch of time piloting one: the shields are super useful, btw!
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: RustyCabbage on March 18, 2022, 07:52:50 PM
(On the other hand, 12 ballistic larges at Paragon range :o could be I'm doomsaying too early.)

It's only 4 ballistics at +100% range - just the hardpoints.
Aye, was referring to that being coupled with +200% fire rate ;)
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 18, 2022, 08:11:43 PM
Ah, makes sense!
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dri on March 18, 2022, 09:19:26 PM
Does Invictus really benefit from Auxiliary Thrusters or does it turn at a decent speed?

Good idea all around to give each faction some more personality both in and out of combat.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 18, 2022, 09:25:30 PM
Turning-wise it's the same as the Onslaught, but it's top speed/accel/decel is significantly better.

On the other hand, its engagement range is long enough that turning is less critical. It depends, I'd say.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dri on March 18, 2022, 09:33:50 PM
Oh wow, its top speed is significantly better than Onslaught, was not expecting that! Well, Onslaught does have Burn Driver.

Also, what exactly does Distributed Fire Control do? I got from the blogpost that it is basically a super buffed Armored Weapon Mounts that prevents range boosting hullmods, but does it do anything else?

Lidar Array when not in active use still boosts weapon range by 25%?
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Aeacus on March 18, 2022, 10:29:17 PM
I have one question: How come the Lidar Array is better than Advanced Targeting Core?  ???

Especially since from the blog:
Quote
but mainly I wanted the ship to feel outdated, and “its targeting systems are so good they’re better than the more modern stuff” doesn’t fit.

By the idea, Lidar Array should be worse, since it is obsolete, but it isn't. It is actually better than Advanced Targeting Core.

Some stats;

Advanced Targeting Core
Active
+100% energy/ballistic range
+60% point-defense range.

Lidar Array
Passive
+25% range

Active
+100% range
+200% rate of fire
+50% projectile speed
reduced recoil

With this, Lidar Array is much better than Paragon's Advanced Targeting Core, since ATC gives only range bonus and that's it.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Twilight Sentinel on March 19, 2022, 12:08:50 AM
I don't think the preview for the Orion Device is working.

***

Very happy to see the LC get some love.  They've been the most orphaned faction for a long time and I mod their ship set even on largely vanilla runs just so their fleets are more interesting and to justify allying with them over another faction.  Otherwise they had access to the lowest number of ships of all factions by a large margin.  Also glad to see the Manticore and Vanguard get added to their roaster, which felt more LC to me than Hegemony to begin with.  I'm actually surprised there wasn't a new capital with the damper field given that system suits the LC's style.  (Side note, have you considered making the Mora into a damper field right click ship?)

The Persean League is getting lots of changes?  Interesting, I'd have put the Dictate down as who needed love next after the LC with changes focused on making them less of a copy of the PL that drops the carriers.  The way I add flavor to the SD in my games is to make them use phase ships, since otherwise it's only TT that does in serious numbers.

Before this blog, I'd have said of the major factions that Tri-Tach, Hegemony, and Persean League have the most distinctive identities.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 19, 2022, 12:25:28 AM
@Aeacus
I mean you're comparing something that's active permanently and not part of a ship system, and Lidar Array which is on a cooldown. I get the concern but it seriously doesn't seem that strong for all the costs this behemoth brings.

Speaking of Lidar Array I got a bit confused on weapon ranges. So the system provides +25% weapon range when it's not active. And then there's the Distributed fire control hullmod which prevents the installation of ITU and DTC, does that also provide 25% range increase alongside tougher weapons? It's been mentioned Retribution will have to get fairly close to use its weapons but I kinda just assumed it has some small bonus built in. If it's seriously going to be a capital with base range weapons then I guess it deserves all that stats lol.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 19, 2022, 12:28:25 AM
PL: Has access to the widest variety of ships and weapons
I would say right now "variety" is more of a Diktat theme. Their main gimmick as a faction is having access to literally all weapons in the game. I don't think any other human faction does that.

With weapons now being split between faction, I'm curious about their new direction. Diktat fleets don't seem to have a consistent theme either - it's just a mixture of stuff that "feels elite".
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Farya on March 19, 2022, 12:46:27 AM
I actually liked how mods added more Diktat ships with Solar Shielding built-in. Maybe go the similar way, but instead of Solar Shielding give them their own unique built-in hullmod? Could be some kind of advanced armor that works similar to SS but better at the cost of being unable to mount Heavy Armor.

And if you gonna add more auxilaries - what about Apogee (H)? That one could be a rarer ship used as flagship for hyperspace patrols or something. Currently Remnant infested systems are simply marked with beacons, sometimes pathers also lay in ambush here - but shouldn't Hegemony do the same sometimes? They would not want people to wander in such places for secrecy reasons.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Eji1700 on March 19, 2022, 12:57:19 AM
Adding 3 new capital ships in a single update looks a bit like giving up on preventing capital spam.

The two seem completely unrelated, no? One is how many ships of a given type exist, and the other is how many ships of a given type are in a specific fleet.


To be fair to the point, I think myself and others would like more "elite" frigates and destroyers.  The options are much better than they used to be, but I'll admit i raised an eyebrow when i found out the Ludd's were getting 2 more capitals.

That said, they're amazing, and fit super well.  But I do see the point that faction diversity doesn't just need to be tied up in super capital ships.  The idea that there's some ludd swarmer destroyer that lets them mount 3 perdition wings or a frigate that's nothing but engines and forward facing missile slots would also do a lot to push their "old tech in massive amounts" doctrine (probably not perfect examples but you get the idea).
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 19, 2022, 12:59:48 AM
My 2 cents about ship colors/skins:

Those that are literally the same thing but with different paint on it are just needless clutter, I get that they exist for flavour. But you go into combat, see a ship you already recognize but this one looks different, yet it does the same exact thing as a normal one. To me that seems like a placeholder for future content (like we're getting now). Also worth noting is that I don't mind factions sharing ships/weapons as long as they don't overlap too much which is right now being fixed.

And then we have skins that are actually different from the original design. Be it better stats, unique hullmod, different mounts, and so on. These are cool but I still don't want too much of that. Especially pirate variants that are a straight up worse version of base ship. Good examples being Falcon(P), Eradicator(P) and Shrike(P). So what I'm saying is that seeing red paint on a ship, in this case, might mean the ship is, A: literally the same, B: worse version than base or C: something completely different. Of course once you know what each ship does, all of this becomes irrelevant.

Anyways glad we're getting brand new stuff instead of more skins.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Drazan on March 19, 2022, 08:31:22 AM
I would like to see skins for all the ships, it just adds so much uniqueness and flavor. The differences should be a bit more consistent thats true, but hey, there is not sooo much ships so its not hard to know all of them.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 19, 2022, 10:26:34 AM
Also, what exactly does Distributed Fire Control do? I got from the blogpost that it is basically a super buffed Armored Weapon Mounts that prevents range boosting hullmods, but does it do anything else?

It reduces weapon damage taken, and EMP damage taken overall, and blocks ITU/DTC; that's it.

Lidar Array when not in active use still boosts weapon range by 25%?

Yep; this *does* affect the turrets, btw.


I have one question: How come the Lidar Array is better than Advanced Targeting Core?  ???

Especially since from the blog:
Quote
but mainly I wanted the ship to feel outdated, and “its targeting systems are so good they’re better than the more modern stuff” doesn’t fit.

By the idea, Lidar Array should be worse, since it is obsolete, but it isn't. It is actually better than Advanced Targeting Core.

...

With this, Lidar Array is much better than Paragon's Advanced Targeting Core, since ATC gives only range bonus and that's it.

Hah! A couple of things here: first off, I don't think we can just brush off the Lidar Array being active - and thus having limited uptime - and also preventing any turreted weapons from firing, only applying its bonus to hardpoints.

Second, as mentioned in the blog post: many of these bonuses (specifically, rate of fire, reduced recoil, projectile speed) are not intrinsic properties of Lidar Array, but specific design features of the Invictus, which was built to take advantage of the window of opportunity Lidar Array opens up.

Also, fwiw, I'm fairly sure the Invictus would be a more effective ship if it had ATC and some other kind of system instead of Lidar Array.



I don't think the preview for the Orion Device is working.

Hmm, weird - seems to be working for me. Hopefully you can see it on twitter, anyway.

I'm actually surprised there wasn't a new capital with the damper field given that system suits the LC's style.  (Side note, have you considered making the Mora into a damper field right click ship?)

I'm not too sure about putting Damper Field on a capital. It's good on ships where either 1) you have a bunch of them so one of them uses it while the rest go to work, and/or 2) on ships that have non-weapon ways of contributing, and just need to survive (e.g. a carrier). I mean, it does let a ship get its flux down some, which is handy on its own, but on a capital... chances are it's going to be the last thing left, and DF would just make it take that much longer to take down. Maybe it could work, though? Just my initial thoughts. I could see experimenting with it at some point.

The Persean League is getting lots of changes?  Interesting, I'd have put the Dictate down as who needed love next after the LC with changes focused on making them less of a copy of the PL that drops the carriers.  The way I add flavor to the SD in my games is to make them use phase ships, since otherwise it's only TT that does in serious numbers.

The Diktat is getting some changes, too.

Before this blog, I'd have said of the major factions that Tri-Tach, Hegemony, and Persean League have the most distinctive identities.

Hmm, interesting - I guess it makes sense about the League, with it having a midline identity, though I wouldn't have included it in the list, just because a lot of factions use a bunch of midline ships. Definitely a subjective evaluation, though, so *thumbs up* and thank for for sharing it!


Speaking of Lidar Array I got a bit confused on weapon ranges. So the system provides +25% weapon range when it's not active. And then there's the Distributed fire control hullmod which prevents the installation of ITU and DTC, does that also provide 25% range increase alongside tougher weapons? It's been mentioned Retribution will have to get fairly close to use its weapons but I kinda just assumed it has some small bonus built in. If it's seriously going to be a capital with base range weapons then I guess it deserves all that stats lol.

DFC gives no bonuses to range, so the Retribution is at base weapon range (plus skills).


To be fair to the point, I think myself and others would like more "elite" frigates and destroyers.  The options are much better than they used to be, but I'll admit i raised an eyebrow when i found out the Ludd's were getting 2 more capitals.

That said, they're amazing, and fit super well.  But I do see the point that faction diversity doesn't just need to be tied up in super capital ships.  The idea that there's some ludd swarmer destroyer that lets them mount 3 perdition wings or a frigate that's nothing but engines and forward facing missile slots would also do a lot to push their "old tech in massive amounts" doctrine (probably not perfect examples but you get the idea).

Hmm. I get what you're saying, but thinking about this outloud - if the faction personality is tied up in a smaller ship, then you've really got to have a bunch of them on the field, right? Whereas if it's a capital, you can have one or two in a fleet, and there is room for more variety among the smaller ships. Plus, the capitals will *still be there* and if they're not faction-unique(ish, at least) then that'll still dilute how unique the faction feels.

My 2 cents about ship colors/skins:

Those that are literally the same thing but with different paint on it are just needless clutter, I get that they exist for flavour. But you go into combat, see a ship you already recognize but this one looks different, yet it does the same exact thing as a normal one. To me that seems like a placeholder for future content (like we're getting now). Also worth noting is that I don't mind factions sharing ships/weapons as long as they don't overlap too much which is right now being fixed.

And then we have skins that are actually different from the original design. Be it better stats, unique hullmod, different mounts, and so on. These are cool but I still don't want too much of that. Especially pirate variants that are a straight up worse version of base ship. Good examples being Falcon(P), Eradicator(P) and Shrike(P). So what I'm saying is that seeing red paint on a ship, in this case, might mean the ship is, A: literally the same, B: worse version than base or C: something completely different. Of course once you know what each ship does, all of this becomes irrelevant.

Anyways glad we're getting brand new stuff instead of more skins.

(FWIW, pretty much on the same page. The early no-modifier skins were a bit of experimentation on our part; they're in now and I wouldn't want to remove them - they're still nice - but it's also hard to see adding more "pure paintjob" type skins.)

I would like to see skins for all the ships, it just adds so much uniqueness and flavor. The differences should be a bit more consistent thats true, but hey, there is not sooo much ships so its not hard to know all of them.

I think you'd be surprised how quickly it would add up! I'm more comfortable with having certain factions (i.e. pirates and the Path) be heavy on faction-specific skins. This both gives them a specific flavor, and helps keep the combinatorial explosion in check.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 19, 2022, 10:41:18 AM
DFC gives no bonuses to range, so the Retribution is at base weapon range (plus skills).
OOF, that's rough. Now I understand why it has all those mounts, especially missile ones. That's certainly going to be a unique ship to pilot but can AI manage such a thing? It's a capital focused on mobility that's going to be outranged by almost everything, I'm just worried it will derp out in combat a lot.

EDIT: Not to forget it seems like its defenses are on par with Atlas MkII, at least it's cheap.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 19, 2022, 11:11:57 AM
It probably won't be the best ship under AI control - or, at least, the safest. It *is* able to use Orion Device pretty well to close in etc. That's just the way it goes, though; usually the things that make a good/interesting player ship also make it harder for the AI to use to its full potential.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 19, 2022, 11:15:41 AM
It probably won't be the best ship under AI control - or, at least, the safest. It *is* able to use Orion Device pretty well to close in etc. That's just the way it goes, though; usually the things that make a good/interesting player ship also make it harder for the AI to use to its full potential.
Oh yeah naturally, I don't expect AI to be so advanced and scary. I'm just hoping it won't do the "try to go in - receive damage along the way - backpedal - go in again" loop due to low range. If it seriously succeeds at getting into firing range without the need of a reckless officer, then I'll be a happy player.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Twilight Sentinel on March 19, 2022, 11:23:36 AM
Hmm, weird - seems to be working for me. Hopefully you can see it on twitter, anyway.

Yeah, got it on Twitter.  However this is all I see on the blog:
Spoiler
(https://i.imgur.com/DHcEZ7r.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Concrete on March 19, 2022, 11:27:07 AM
On the topic of skins and stuff, I think there are multiple things to consider. Of every ship that has visual variety in the game right now(regardless of whether this is accompanied by a stat difference or not) I really like them all. So in theory I'd be happy with more. And there is something to say about the image of a scavenger fleet looking like a rainbow with different ships pulled together from all factions. But I do also see the argument that it makes identifying stuff for the first time potentially messy when skins are inconsistent with their gameplay impact.
I think it's fine to go into skins with ships that don't really "matter" in the battle gameplay. So logistics ships primarily, the variety of Buffalos is nice. It works best here, I think, as you'll never really be eyeing up a purple and white Phaeton and feeling really ignorant of what its combat capabilities are. And I'd imagine lore-wise that there are a lot more logistics ships than any other kind, so there is more of a reason for factions to mark their civil property. I think a Diktat skin for the Prometheus(and tankers in general) in particular makes sense, I can see them making a big deal of their presumably extremely nationalized fuel industry.
Other than that, skins should imply variants with gameplay implications, which they all generally seem to. Fourteenth Battlegroup ships feel special and I really like them. So I think that's the direction to go. Just legitimately rare variants of a slim selection of ships that make sense.
All in all though, even if something does sound nice to have; if it is only visual and doesn't affect gameplay it's hard to argue that time is best spent on it compared to the alternative.

Another bit of a speculative lore aside, I think ship skins generally make more sense with lower tech ships. As they're more likely to have existed for longer and have more provenance, visual identification of ships was likely more important in the past, assuming electronic identification of ships was theoretically less of a given(also a decent justification for the transponder-off factions to be more visually distinct). And likely more of a meme than something legitimate to the setting, but I can imagine those operating more advanced ships being more hesitant to paint them as perhaps an engineer angrily took offense to covering their advanced laser-scattering reflective coating and losing an estimated 1.2% of the protection against such weapons that it was designed to mitigate.

Especially pirate variants that are a straight up worse version of base ship. Good examples being Falcon(P)-

Falcon(P) stands out as being remarkably good actually. Like fighting them helmed by the AI I think they land successfully as weaker. But I feel stronger piloting the (P) version than I do the regular Falcon.


1 vs 1 (which, very limited usefulness) it absolutely mauls an Onslaught-

NOO! My boy is being bullied!
For real though, it's nice to see it get some real siblings and now piloting the Onslaught I can start to feel like a bit of a hipster while everyone goes and plays with the new toys. Not that I won't be as well, I suppose.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 19, 2022, 11:35:43 AM
Especially pirate variants that are a straight up worse version of base ship. Good examples being Falcon(P)-
Falcon(P) stands out as being remarkably good actually. Like fighting them helmed by the AI I think they land successfully as weaker. But I feel stronger piloting the (P) version than I do the regular Falcon.
Oh my bad, I meant that Falcon(P) and ships after it were good examples, while simple worse stats were a bad example. So good example as being well implemented, not a "good" example of something bad for me. Pirate Falcons are monsters that's well known.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Candesce on March 19, 2022, 11:46:17 AM
Oh my bad, I meant that Falcon(P) and ships after it were good examples, while simple worse stats were a bad example.
So, the Pirate Wolf, Pirate Afflictor, and Pirate Shade, right?

Those all have lower DP costs than the more functional non-pirate version, but that's not exactly a notable advantage in the early game or for anyone who wants all their ships captained. The ship limit isn't really friendly to them, either.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Twilight Sentinel on March 19, 2022, 11:48:58 AM
Outright weaker variants of ships are fine to me for P and LP ships.  These add more variety to those factions and are good enemies during the early game for the player to push around.  The only real downside to them is it's not always clear to the player that one is an objectively worse ship.  Especially when sometimes those variants are just recolours (P Enforcer) or sidegrades (P Shriek).
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 19, 2022, 11:55:38 AM
Outright weaker variants of ships are fine to me for P and LP ships.  These add more variety to those factions and are good enemies during the early game for the player to push around.  The only real downside to them is it's not always clear to the player that one is an objectively worse ship.  Especially when sometimes those variants are just recolours (P Enforcer) or sidegrades (P Shriek).
Yea this was my whole point basically. If every single pirate variant functioned the same, then ok, as it stands right now, you have to carefully read everything.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Farya on March 19, 2022, 12:04:14 PM
I am all for pirate variants to be a sidegrades rather than overall downgrades to their stock variants. They all should in some way be better even if at the cost of some other downside. Reduced maintenance and recovery cost is a valid potential upside to me, especially for high tech ships which are usually costly to maintain. Cheaper pirate variants even if worser stat-wise would be useful early game. Pirate variants being more flexible like Shrike (P) could also be interesting, even if it comes at a cost - early game you have a limited choice of weaponry, being able to compose a workable loadout out of whatever you managed to scavenge would be useful too.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 19, 2022, 12:13:52 PM
Yeah, got it on Twitter.  However this is all I see on the blog:

Hmm. My guess is some js blocker on your end, maybe?

I think a Diktat skin for the Prometheus(and tankers in general) in particular makes sense, I can see them making a big deal of their presumably extremely nationalized fuel industry.

This might not happen, but: I like the way you think :)
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Farya on March 19, 2022, 12:31:42 PM
I think a Diktat skin for the Prometheus(and tankers in general) in particular makes sense, I can see them making a big deal of their presumably extremely nationalized fuel industry.

This might not happen, but: I like the way you think :)
What about some completely new combat tanker for Diktat then? Could be something midline and more oriented for compact exploration fleets or combat oriented fleets where every ship in a fleet is supposed to reasonably contribute in combat. Because current low techie tankers could only fend off very low level threats, like a Kite or two. It could also be optimised for orbital bombardments - that's a Diktat after all, that is not exactly the nicest faction in the sector. And it simply a fashionable way to assert the market dominance by dropping some antimatter on your arising competitor colony.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Twilight Sentinel on March 19, 2022, 03:34:49 PM
What about some completely new combat tanker for Diktat then? Could be something midline and more oriented for compact exploration fleets or combat oriented fleets where every ship in a fleet is supposed to reasonably contribute in combat. Because current low techie tankers could only fend off very low level threats, like a Kite or two. It could also be optimised for orbital bombardments - that's a Diktat after all, that is not exactly the nicest faction in the sector. And it simply a fashionable way to assert the market dominance by dropping some antimatter on your arising competitor colony.
That's exactly what I was thinking.  There's no combat tanker ships in the game, so one or two could really fit a state that relies on fuel (and crabs) to prop up its dictatorship.  There are very few tankers in the game as it is, certainly compared to the variety we have of freighters and combat freighters (hound, cerberus, wayfarerer, shepherd, mule, gemini, and venture).
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 19, 2022, 03:37:23 PM
Prometheus MkII crying in the corner.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: woodsmoke on March 19, 2022, 04:02:40 PM
I'd have put the Dictate down as who needed love [...] with changes focused on making them less of a copy of the PL

I want to say this is funny because, if I remember correctly, the Diktat predates the PL, at least in development, by quite a while. I remember thinking, when PL and LC were first implemented, it felt like the Diktat's big brother had moved in and claimed the "northwest" third of the Core and was staring down the Hegemony, daring them to bully Philip again.

Probably because, up to that point, the Diktat had been the only faction really using the Conquest (which, hey, to Alex's point about capitals conveying faction identity).
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Melanoc3tus II on March 19, 2022, 04:09:15 PM
Outright weaker variants of ships are fine to me for P and LP ships.  These add more variety to those factions and are good enemies during the early game for the player to push around.  The only real downside to them is it's not always clear to the player that one is an objectively worse ship.  Especially when sometimes those variants are just recolours (P Enforcer) or sidegrades (P Shriek).
Yea this was my whole point basically. If every single pirate variant functioned the same, then ok, as it stands right now, you have to carefully read everything.

You say that like it's a negative - I personally love reading descriptions for ships, and it's absolutely necessary in any case, for any ship if you aren't just clicking auto fit and praying. I'm fine with literacy.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Twilight Sentinel on March 19, 2022, 05:29:22 PM
Prometheus MkII crying in the corner.
Does that count as a combat tanker if it has the same capacity as a Phaeton?

I want to say this is funny because, if I remember correctly, the Diktat predates the PL, at least in development, by quite a while. I remember thinking, when PL and LC were first implemented, it felt like the Diktat's big brother had moved in and claimed the "northwest" third of the Core and was staring down the Hegemony, daring them to bully Philip again.

Probably because, up to that point, the Diktat had been the only faction really using the Conquest (which, hey, to Alex's point about capitals conveying faction identity).
That's probably because I started playing the game after that point.  As the League has a greater presence in the sector and is mostly the same as the Dictate but with more, it felt like the Dictate was the clone.  It looks like they got a few changes at some point compared to the last time I looked at the files, losing their 3/3 split of warships and carriers for the default 4/2 split that the Hegemony, Luddic Church, and Independents use.  So they have lost a bit of that carrier focus identity.  They did always feel like the factions exemplified by the hammerhead/sunder battle line backed up by carriers.  Since so many of their fleets were made up of that extremely solid makeup when when I first started.  Individual ships are fast and highly specialized, but work well together in fleet settings.  While the Dictate was all about top heavy fleets of cruisers and capitals, dropping the carriers entirely.  Admittedly though, I rarely fought Dictate fleets so I don't have much of a feel for them.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Aeacus on March 19, 2022, 06:07:35 PM
Hah! A couple of things here: first off, I don't think we can just brush off the Lidar Array being active - and thus having limited uptime - and also preventing any turreted weapons from firing, only applying its bonus to hardpoints.

Second, as mentioned in the blog post: many of these bonuses (specifically, rate of fire, reduced recoil, projectile speed) are not intrinsic properties of Lidar Array, but specific design features of the Invictus, which was built to take advantage of the window of opportunity Lidar Array opens up.

Also, fwiw, I'm fairly sure the Invictus would be a more effective ship if it had ATC and some other kind of system instead of Lidar Array.

I know that Lidar Array is limited ability, and has a cooldown, but it also provides other good bonuses that makes the cooldown negligible, like triple the fire rate, among other things.

Now, Invictus is supposed to be outdated, compared to the other low-tech, midline and especially high-tech ships, where Paragon is the pinnacle of the Domain's battleship designs. But i just can't understand, lore wise, how could outdated ship outrange the pinnacle of ship designs (Paragon).

Some stats;

Invictus
Lidar Array range - Default range - Weapon
2400 - 1200 - Gauss Cannon
1800 - 900 - Mark IX Autocannon
1800 - 900 - Hellbore Cannon
1800 - 900 - Hephaestus Assault Gun
1800 - 900 - Devastator Cannon
1800 - 900 - Mjolnir Cannon
1400 - 700 - Storm Needler

Paragon
ATC range - Default range - Weapon
2000 - 1000 - Tachyon Lance
2000 - 1000 - High Intensity Laser
1400 - 700 - Autopulse Laser
1400 - 700 - Plasma Cannon
1200 - 750 - Paladin PD System (only +60% range)

So, depending on a loadout, Invictus will outrange Paragon by 400-1000 range. And it's not only the range, since when Lidar Array is active, it will also triple the firerate of the 4x Large Ballistic hardpoints it has, among other things.

Making a situation, where when equipped by 4x Gauss Cannons and active Lidar Array ability, Invictus will outrange Paragon, regardless what loadout Paragon has, while also increasing Gauss Cannon firerate from default 2 seconds per shot, to 0.6 seconds per shot. And Gauss Cannon being Kinetic weapon, it will generate loads of hard flux for me, that i can't dissipate with shields up. (Btw, i'm running Paragon with 4x Tachyon Lances, and i use it as a sniper ship, sniping enemy ships from extreme range.) Ontop of that, Paragon is slow, making it impossible to strafe the incoming shots, especially since Lidar Array also gives +50% bullet speed.

Now, i'd love when ATC wouldn't be constantly active and would also have cooldown, like Lidar Array, while providing the same bonuses. I'd love to time my shots, activate ATC for bonuses and fire my Tachyon Lances every 2.16 seconds, rather than firing them after every 6.5 seconds, up to 2000 range.

In my opinion, Lidar Array would be more balanced towards Paragon, when it only provides +50% range, and not +100% range. It can keep the rest of the bonuses. This way, Paragon will remain as range king and pinnacle of the Domain's battleship designs.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dri on March 19, 2022, 06:50:28 PM
Can you install Makeshift Shield Generator on an Invictus and then install a Shield Shunt to get 15% armor bonus? That is +1,500 armor for Invictus, plus another 1000 from Armored Weapon Mounts. 12,500 armor total, not sure if it comes out to be OP efficient though.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Candesce on March 19, 2022, 06:53:53 PM
But i just can't understand, lore wise, how could outdated ship outrange the pinnacle of ship designs (Paragon).
The Paragon is an energy weapon boat, and that's always meant it's range isn't going to be incredible. The ATC only brings energy weapons up enough to compete with ballistics, not surpass them. Try doing the math on Atlas IIs armed with Gauss in comparison, say.

That Fortress Shield is an outright hard counter to Lidar Array is much more relevant to asking which of them is more advanced than the other, I'd say.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: SafariJohn on March 19, 2022, 07:07:22 PM
RE Invictus vs. Paragon:

The only person with his hands on Invictus has said Paragon eats it for breakfast.

If LIDAR is so godly (nevermind that it gets beat by the ATC ship), why does no other ship use it? Because it takes a dreadnought-sized hull to fit it - just look how far apart the laser turrets are!

That giant space requirement is what makes Invictus, and thus LIDAR, obsolete. It makes Invictus guzzle fuel, take literal tons of crew, and prevents it from mounting a shield generator. Even Atlas Mk.2 has a shield.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: DaShiv on March 19, 2022, 08:08:09 PM
I know that Lidar Array is limited ability, and has a cooldown, but it also provides other good bonuses that makes the cooldown negligible, like triple the fire rate, among other things.

Now, Invictus is supposed to be outdated, compared to the other low-tech, midline and especially high-tech ships, where Paragon is the pinnacle of the Domain's battleship designs. But i just can't understand, lore wise, how could outdated ship outrange the pinnacle of ship designs (Paragon).

Because range isn't the sole determinant of the quality of ship design - if that were the case, then most low tech ships at equivalent size classes would be simply "better" than most high tech ships, full stop. It's an extremely facile avenue for analysis.

I'm not surprised that in real testing the Paragon eats the Invictus alive, because Lidar Array takes up the active system slot, while the Paragon is equipped with both ATC and Fortress Shield. The Paragon could simply activate Fortress Shield to absorb the Lidar Array output while it's active, then once Lidar has been depleted the Paragon will easily pummel the Invictus from way beyond the Invictus's pitiful +25% passive range. In fact, beam Paragons still outrange the Invictus even with Lidar active for any weapon other than Gauss, and I highly doubt the Invictus has the flux to sustain 4x Gauss with 3x Lidar acceleration for any decent length of time (which, again, would just be easily absorbed by Fortress Shield anyway). It's quite likely that the Invictus will have trouble managing 4x Gauss even before Lidar - the posted build has less than 50% of the dissipation required for 4x Gauss alone, before even considering the other large mounts.

Personally I'm waiting to see what the flux and system uptime situation (max charges, charge replenishment, duration/cooldown, etc.) turns out to be for Invictus before passing judgement, since that's going to have a huge impact on what kind of damage output the Invictus is actually capable of sustaining across the entire battle. The Invictus obviously has considerable burst potential, but might require tons of support to keep it covered if it needs to constantly vent. Right now the Invictus reminds me of an overgrown Atlas Mk.II: amazing on paper, but tactically problematic during actual deployment. It's hard to measure how DP-efficient the Invictus would be without actually seeing how much sustained DPS it's capable of and how much fleet support it requires.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: HiddenPorpoise on March 19, 2022, 08:45:41 PM
Now, Invictus is supposed to be outdated, compared to the other low-tech, midline and especially high-tech ships, where Paragon is the pinnacle of the Domain's battleship designs. But i just can't understand, lore wise, how could outdated ship outrange the pinnacle of ship designs (Paragon).
The Invictus is a means of getting big guns on target and is built around supporting those big guns. Everything else about it is crude and gets around that crudeness by being big. The Paragon doesn't have its theoretical maximum reach but doesn't need it as badly for endurance and will waste fewer shots at that distance.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 19, 2022, 08:59:20 PM
Can you install Makeshift Shield Generator on an Invictus and then install a Shield Shunt to get 15% armor bonus? That is +1,500 armor for Invictus, plus another 1000 from Armored Weapon Mounts. 12,500 armor total, not sure if it comes out to be OP efficient though.

You can't, no - ships with right-click systems can't install MSG.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Orange Juice Goose on March 19, 2022, 09:27:38 PM
Mmmmm space bricks. Suitable for building shelters to keep the big bad space wolf out.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dri on March 19, 2022, 11:26:14 PM
Is adding content the fun part of game development? All the framework is built and now you get to fill it with stuff? I'm not a developer but I'd imagine this stage of game development is really fun.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Aeacus on March 20, 2022, 03:07:22 AM
The Paragon is an energy weapon boat, and that's always meant it's range isn't going to be incredible. The ATC only brings energy weapons up enough to compete with ballistics, not surpass them. Try doing the math on Atlas IIs armed with Gauss in comparison, say.

That Fortress Shield is an outright hard counter to Lidar Array is much more relevant to asking which of them is more advanced than the other, I'd say.

Paragon, with it's ATC, is the current Range King in the game. No other ship can fire as far as Paragon can.

And for Atlas Mk.II comparison, sure.

Atlas Mk.II has Accelerated Ammo Feeder as it's ability, which does increase RoF, but does not increase weapon range. Best what Atlas Mk.II can have, is Integrated Targeting Unit, with +60% range. With this, and equipping 2x Gauss Cannons on it (since it's max what it can take in terms of Large Ballistics), it gains 1920 range for it's Gauss Cannons. 1920 range is still less than 2000 range for Tachyon Lance and High Intensity Laser, when the latter two are put on Paragon.

If LIDAR is so godly (nevermind that it gets beat by the ATC ship), why does no other ship use it? Because it takes a dreadnought-sized hull to fit it - just look how far apart the laser turrets are!

That giant space requirement is what makes Invictus, and thus LIDAR, obsolete. It makes Invictus guzzle fuel, take literal tons of crew, and prevents it from mounting a shield generator. Even Atlas Mk.2 has a shield.

Why no other ship uses Lidar Array? Perhaps because it isn't in the game as of yet? Who knows, maybe in the future, we may see more ships with Lidar Array.

Invictus'es fuel consumption and crew requirement doesn't matter when it is part of the AI controlled fleet, opposing your fleet. These two are only minor hindrances when Invictus is in player's fleet. And regarding it's lack of shields, it has armor to counter that, and plethora of it as well. 10.000 as a base, which can be greatly increased with hullmods. (E.g Armored Weapon Mounts, besides toughening up weapons, also add +10% armor, so extra 1000 armor, to total of 11.000 armor).
2nd best ship, in terms of armor rating of 1750 is Onslaught. After that, at 1700 armor rating, comes Guardian. And next, at 1500 armor rating, are several ships (Prometheus Mk.II, Legion, Paragon, Ziggurat, Radiant and Tesseract).

Also, it has the highest hull integrity as well, 40.000. That's at least twice of what is currently in-game. Next in line, with half of that, at 20.000 hull integrity, are: Onslaught, Radiant and Guardian. Step down from those, at 18.000 hull integrity is Paragon.
And when putting on Reinforced Bulkheads, that give +40% hull, that adds another 16.000, to the total of 56.000 hull integrity.

So, Invictus doesn't need shields at all, with this kind of armor amount and hull integrity. Also, lack of shields actually helps Invictus, since it can dissipate flux at all times. While all other ships with shields, need to drop their shields, to dissipate flux.

---

Lore wise, i'd paint Invictus green and put it into Derlict class, since it fits well between Rapart and Guardian. It's essentially Rampart's big brother. A flying box without shields, with loads of ballistic mounts. And it being outdated, just like all other Derlicts are, makes the fit even more snug.

Because range isn't the sole determinant of the quality of ship design - if that were the case, then most low tech ships at equivalent size classes would be simply "better" than most high tech ships, full stop. It's an extremely facile avenue for analysis.

I'm not surprised that in real testing the Paragon eats the Invictus alive, because Lidar Array takes up the active system slot, while the Paragon is equipped with both ATC and Fortress Shield. The Paragon could simply activate Fortress Shield to absorb the Lidar Array output while it's active, then once Lidar has been depleted the Paragon will easily pummel the Invictus from way beyond the Invictus's pitiful +25% passive range. In fact, beam Paragons still outrange the Invictus even with Lidar active for any weapon other than Gauss, and I highly doubt the Invictus has the flux to sustain 4x Gauss with 3x Lidar acceleration for any decent length of time (which, again, would just be easily absorbed by Fortress Shield anyway). It's quite likely that the Invictus will have trouble managing 4x Gauss even before Lidar - the posted build has less than 50% of the dissipation required for 4x Gauss alone, before even considering the other large mounts.

Personally I'm waiting to see what the flux and system uptime situation (max charges, charge replenishment, duration/cooldown, etc.) turns out to be for Invictus before passing judgement, since that's going to have a huge impact on what kind of damage output the Invictus is actually capable of sustaining across the entire battle. The Invictus obviously has considerable burst potential, but might require tons of support to keep it covered if it needs to constantly vent. Right now the Invictus reminds me of an overgrown Atlas Mk.II: amazing on paper, but tactically problematic during actual deployment. It's hard to measure how DP-efficient the Invictus would be without actually seeing how much sustained DPS it's capable of and how much fleet support it requires.

Low tech ships have higher armor/hull rating of the three classes, while high tech ships are fastest of the three, while being most fragile. And mid-line are between the two. What is valued with the ship, is dependent on personal play style. Some people like to be up close, tanking shots. Others prefer to kite at outskirts and out range opponents.

Almost all ships can have either DTC or ITU, to increase their weapon range. With this, there is little difference which ship to use. Except Paragon and it's unique ATC. Making Paragon ideal for those, who value weapon range the most.
Now, if i'd want firepower, i could use Onslaught or when i want even more energy firepower, i can use Radiant, since it can hold 5x Tachyon Lances, one more than Paragon. But i prefer to play on extreme ranges, making Paragon ideal for my play style.
Btw, it would be nice, if, in the future, players could change out the default Active Ability and choose another one, more fitting to their play style (e.g to me, Paragon's Fortress Shield is completely useless and i don't use it at all. I even rarely use shields, since i have range advantage. That is, until Invictus comes and out ranges my Paragon).

Invictus'es flux amount and dissipation, could be it's only saving grace, regarding the sustainability of Gauss Cannons. But we don't know that as of yet, since Invictus is still under construction and it's stats may change prior to launch.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 20, 2022, 03:18:10 AM
Ah, I see you're using the ol' bait tactic. Unfortunately for that to work there has to be some stronger, more believable arguments. Then again someone just might fall for "Paragon is now obsolete because of Invictus" and start to argue, but that's a waste of posts in this otherwise interesting blog post thread. Before anyone attacks me for being negative, the DEVELOPER himself proved this whole essay above wrong.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 20, 2022, 03:22:34 AM
I too love pretending soft flux shield-inefficient beams are comparable to 700 hit strength kinetics.

Not to mention capital ships always have officers, and both ballistic mastery and gunnery implants benefit gauss cannon more than even 1000 range beams.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Aeacus on March 20, 2022, 04:37:51 AM
Ah, I see you're using the ol' bait tactic. Unfortunately for that to work there has to be some stronger, more believable arguments. Then again someone just might fall for "Paragon is now obsolete because of Invictus" and start to argue, but that's a waste of posts in this otherwise interesting blog post thread. Before anyone attacks me for being negative, the DEVELOPER himself proved this whole essay above wrong.

I did not say that Paragon is obsolete after Invictus arrives. What i'm saying, that Invictus'es greater range does not make sense lore wise, since Invictus is supposed to be outdated, with inferior technological advancements. Perhaps even obsolete ones, compared to what is currently available in the Sector. Currently, Paragon is top-of-the-line, regarding technological advancements and is the only ship in game, that has the ATC, that provides +100% range to energy and ballistic weapons.

Lore wise, it doesn't make sense, that Luddic Church now gets a capital, that equals to the range bonus of ATC, while also providing additional bonuses, that ATC is not capable of, cooldown or not.

I too love pretending soft flux shield-inefficient beams are comparable to 700 hit strength kinetics.

Not to mention capital ships always have officers, and both ballistic mastery and gunnery implants benefit gauss cannon more than even 1000 range beams.

Soft flux energy weapons vs hard flux kinetic weapons, is yes, another point, that favors Invictus, while decreasing the value of Paragon. Now, Invictus doesn't have a shield, making soft flux energy weapons more effective against it (i hope).

Now, i tried to keep the comparison between Invictus'es Lidar Array vs Paragon's ATC comparison simple, without adding additional game mechanics to it. But since some folks here did bring additional aspects to the argument, namely Fortress Shield, Lidar Array cooldown and flux amount/venting rates of Invicuts, i feel that i should need to include other aspects as well, namely player skills.

Here, i bring forth 3 skills: Gunnery Implants, Energy Weapon Mastery and Ballistic Weapon Mastery.

Now, Gunnery Implants extend the energy and ballistic weapon range by +15% and since it applies both to Invictus and Paragon, this skill isn't needed in the argument. However, Energy Weapon Mastery and Ballistic Weapon Mastery are needed.

Energy Weapon Mastery does not increase the range of energy weapons. It only boosts damage up to 600 range, with diminishing returns up to 1000 range.
Ballistic Weapon Mastery, in the other hand, does increase ballistic weapons range and that by +10%.

With that, the range gap, between Invictus and Paragon increases even further.
From my earlier comparison, but now, with player skill:

Invictus
Ballistic Mastery with Lidar Array - Lidar Array range - Default range - Weapon
2520 - 2400 - 1200 - Gauss Cannon
1890 - 1800 - 900 - Mark IX Autocannon
1890 - 1800 - 900 - Hellbore Cannon
1890 - 1800 - 900 - Hephaestus Assault Gun
1890 - 1800 - 900 - Devastator Cannon
1890 - 1800 - 900 - Mjolnir Cannon
1470 - 1400 - 700 - Storm Needler

Paragon
ATC range - Default range - Weapon
2000 - 1000 - Tachyon Lance
2000 - 1000 - High Intensity Laser
1400 - 700 - Autopulse Laser
1400 - 700 - Plasma Cannon
1200 - 750 - Paladin PD System (only +60% range)

With Ballistic Mastery, Invictus will outrange Paragon by 520-1120 range.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 20, 2022, 05:24:34 AM
Vanguard while using Burn drive is faster than high tech frigates. By your logic that also doesn't make sense lore wise... Come on dude just drop it.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: DaShiv on March 20, 2022, 05:31:30 AM
I did not say that Paragon is obsolete after Invictus arrives. What i'm saying, that Invictus'es greater range does not make sense lore wise, since Invictus is supposed to be outdated, with inferior technological advancements. Perhaps even obsolete ones, compared to what is currently available in the Sector. Currently, Paragon is top-of-the-line, regarding technological advancements and is the only ship in game, that has the ATC, that provides +100% range to energy and ballistic weapons.

Lore wise, it doesn't make sense, that Luddic Church now gets a capital, that equals to the range bonus of ATC, while also providing additional bonuses, that ATC is not capable of, cooldown or not.

Once again - there's no lore equivalence between range and "technological advancements". Gauss has the longest base range of any non-missile weapon, and it's a ballistic weapon that can't be mounted on any high tech ships. And low tech ships generally have better range than high tech ships even though by lore they're less technologically advanced.

You're overgeneralizing and drawing erroneous conclusions based on a fixation with the Paragon, which is not uncommon among newer players. The Paragon is a unique ship that combines long range with on-demand damage mitigation. Rather than representing the pinnacle of high tech doctrine, it offers something quite uncharacteristic to high tech fleets - to help plug a weakness of high tech doctrine, if you will. Likewise, the Retribution appears to be the fastest capital from any tech doctrine, but again it would be equally a mistake to say it means that high speed is representative of low tech doctrine; rather, like the Paragon it provides something different to low tech fleets that would otherwise be lacking.

If anything, Invictus appears to be simply doubling down on the most common traits of low tech ships: long range, reliance on armor tanking, heavy PD, and being terribly overgunned/underfluxed. In many ways, Invictus is the most "low tech" ship and thus aligns well with existing lore.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: SafariJohn on March 20, 2022, 05:40:01 AM
I wish carriers were listed more clearly on the fleet info - it's too hard to tell which fighter wing goes with which ship.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 20, 2022, 07:54:13 AM
Is adding content the fun part of game development? All the framework is built and now you get to fill it with stuff? I'm not a developer but I'd imagine this stage of game development is really fun.

It really depends! I *love* designing new ships (and weapons), so that's fun. Especially when I get to stretch the bounds of what's in vanilla. There are also some kinds of game systems and design type things that I love about working on the "framework", too. Conversely, some kinds of content and some kind of framework work can feel like a bit of a slog. I think ultimately it comes down to how mentally engaging something is; the distinction between content and framework is less important for the fun factor.

New ships really are in a sweet spot where it's mostly just the fun stuff :)

I wish carriers were listed more clearly on the fleet info - it's too hard to tell which fighter wing goes with which ship.

Hmm, that's a good point - not something I would've even thought about. Thank you for bringing this up, I'll ... keep it in mind.


(Please keep it civil, everyone. It's fine-ish so far but it looks like there's some movement towards things getting more heated than they need to be.)
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Soda Savvy on March 20, 2022, 10:03:18 AM
In regards to the whole range vs tech level thing, everything in the combat field is an abstraction after all, and gameplay comes first when at all possible.

However, one could perhaps look at it from this angle: As everything is abstracted, and we know Starsector ships to be torchships, consider the following: Weapon range cutoff just represents the range at which targeting brackets and rounds are more likely to miss than hit. Some ballistic weapons go further simply because ballistic rounds keep on flying well after an energy weapon has diffused from distance.

Lowtech just puts out so many shots that one is more likely to hit sooner or later, compared to that tachyon lance or laser which might still hit the target, but at such a range it's a mere tickle.


Now, to Alex: We're getting a ton of amazing new military ships, but have you considered adding an extra civilian ship or two to round things out? It does seem odd at times there's a hundred plus military ships but only, like, 1 bus.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 20, 2022, 10:22:56 AM
Hopefully, uniquifying means independents and the player faction get a few unique and distinct military ship blueprints to produce ships only they (and maybe generic arms dealers) can produce.  (Maybe Apogee is used only by Independents.)

Currently, the only ships that could be unique to the player faction are Legion XIV, Revenant, and Phantom (and maybe Pather ships since Pathers have no industry world).  Aside from those, it is obvious the player is like either a frankenstein monster or an all-your-powers-combined final (exam) boss faction.  Legion XIV is obviously a Hegemony ship (that they lost).  Kind of rubbing in Hegemony's faces that the player has one of their ships they no longer own.  Revenant and Phantom are nice, but they are stat stick logistics ships, not combat ships.  Would be nice if there was one or two combat ships that the player has a chance to own and set it apart from another faction.

Hopefully, the Pathers will get a heavy industry of their own.  Getting their blueprints is a luck-based event.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Hiruma Kai on March 20, 2022, 11:38:17 AM
Thanks for the sneak peak Alex.

I do think the capital variety will be quite welcome.  Certainly when I'm describing NPC fleets to others or on the forums, it is often in the form of what the capitals are.  A triple Radiant fleet, a quadruple Conquest, or a Onslaught XIV and Legion fleet.  At least when discussing late game fights.  The lower chaff generally isn't fight defining (except perhaps in the case of hand created storyline fights - of which I would love to have more themed and hand crafted NPC fleets since they tend to be more memorable).

So I look forward to having more types of end game fleets and describing them as a double Invictus fleet or that missile spamming double Pegasus and Conquest fleet in addition to all the current variations.

As far as the quad Gauss Invictus, since there's no flux cost reduction, you have a burst period, then hit max flux, at which point it becomes flux limited DPS which essentially ignores fire rate.

Based on the numbers in the post, it has 40,000 flux capacity, and 600 dissipation base.  Max dissipation with 50 vents would then be 1100.  Throw on 10% for flux regulation, +50 for 5 more vents, and assume Ordinance Expertise on 190 OP, that puts upper theoretical maximum around 1600 flux/second.  Gauss is 600 flux/second for 350 kinetic damage per second.  12x is 7200 flux/second.  So 7200-1600 = 5,600 flux per second build up.  So about 7 seconds of fire, before it drops down to 2.6 shots per second.  Which is about 29,400 kinetic damage (in 700 point chunk spread over those 7 seconds) during the burst phase, and about 910 kinetic damage per second afterwards.

That much burst kinetic is scary against battlecruisers like Conquests and Odysseys, but Onslaughts and Paragons can likely take that without too much issue.  Certainly an Onslaught is just going to burn straight in through the range band.  Dunno how well the active flak cannister will work against a point blank quad reaper strike, but I'll probably find out the hard way.  :)

I suppose, without fortress shield, a Paragon might be in trouble after taking that kind of volley on it's shields, although likely could take multiple barrages like that on it's armor.  But unlike the Paragon, the Invictus can't vent and get a fresh 41,000 or more damage buffer.  The Invictus has 40,000 hull once (or buffed by Reinforced Bulkheads and Blast doors to 64,000, but that comes at the cost of flux dissipation most likely).  High Intensity Lasers and Tachyons Lances will be really good against the Invictus since it's all armor or hull damage.  The soft-flux disadvantage doesn't come into play.

Also, those new beam torpedoes are going to have a field day against the Invictus since they'll likely shoot from beyond it's cannister flak range.  Pegasus equipped with those might just be a straight up hard counter.

In any case, with all these cool new ships and weapons, I'm going to have to play with them personally to get a feel for what works well and what doesn't.  Without that play test experience, I find it really hard to make good predictions.

That said, I do like how Church fleets are going to make you want to pack in the high explosives, while Persean fleets are going to be making me really consider upping my PD allotment.  Which is good since I like the idea that sometimes you want to switch up your weapons loadout to adapt to the enemy fleets you'll be fighting.  High Intensity Lasers strike me as a good choice against the Invictus, for example, where as investing in a pair of Paladins might be good when facing a Pegasus.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: FooF on March 20, 2022, 12:17:49 PM
The other thing they doesn’t seem to be mentioned too much is that the Invictus’ main battery is limited to the maneuverability of the behemoth. Being able to hit Paragons is one thing but if that long range and fast fire rate can’t keep up with a slightly faster ship, what good is it? It’s the Cruisers I’m thinking of: Falcon P, Missile Boat Auroras, Doom, Burn Drive Dominators, maybe even Eagles and Champions that can outmaneuver the main battery and still out range the mere +25% range bonus or just duke it out with the one or two Large guns. I don’t expect Destroyers and Frigates to put much of a dent in a dreadnought but a Cruiser might.

Likewise, the Odyssey and Conquest should have an easy time outmaneuvering the teeth of the Invictus and pummeling it with heavy firepower. The Onslaught and Legion might have some trouble and the Atlas/Prometheus Mk. II will be sitting ducks. I see a lot of soft and hard counters to this kind of specialized ship, hence why it’s obsolete. However, in the one way that it is strong, it is really strong. If anything, it’s the best station-buster out there.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: intrinsic_parity on March 20, 2022, 12:37:12 PM
The lack of shields seems like a major downside for fighting stations. Even such a large amount of armor, won't really compare to shields against star fortresses with HIL/Tac Lance/hellbore etc. It might be possible that the overwhelming damage output could be enough to simply knock the station out before it can do too much damage, but that just seems unlikely to me.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Linnis on March 20, 2022, 02:22:44 PM
The lack of shields seems like a major downside for fighting stations. Even such a large amount of armor, won't really compare to shields against star fortresses with HIL/Tac Lance/hellbore etc. It might be possible that the overwhelming damage output could be enough to simply knock the station out before it can do too much damage, but that just seems unlikely to me.

I would have thought so as well before doing a pirate only playthrough. If the player is willing to lose a couple hundred of supplies and crew, simply ordering all ships to aggressively engage a station works wonderfully well. Instead of trading efficiently, the player can simply overwhelms the station defenses with pure numbers.

Thematically this makes sense too.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: SafariJohn on March 20, 2022, 03:19:40 PM
Send in meatshields like Eradicator and Venture to soak for the Invictus. Just like the real Church!
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dri on March 20, 2022, 03:56:34 PM
Lets get real here, everyone is going to put Armored Weapon Mounts, Blast Doors and Reinforced Bulkheads on the Invictus—with just those 3 hullmods you're looking at 64,000 hull and 11,000 armor.

This thing is NOT going to go down fast even if it gets surrounded and you'd have to be just plain foolish to not set escorts. I mean 64,000 damn hull on top of 11,000 armor! I know the armor only counts as 1,100 armor for dmg reduction but still!.

Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Thaago on March 20, 2022, 04:53:05 PM
Its going to take a lot of beating to take down! Radiants (and Paragons too though fortress shield is its own thing) have given a good reason to use excessive amount of kinetic damage, to the point of doing moderate refits when going hunting ordos. This one gives a good reason to have good anti armor and anti hull weapons, though the usual torpedo spam is also going to be very effective (as Hiruma said, we are certainly going to see how well right click flak canister deals with quad reapers).
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Hiruma Kai on March 20, 2022, 04:59:20 PM
Invictus is not going to go down fast, as it is a 60 DP ship, but on the other hand, it's not like it's strikes me as it's as some extraordinarily tanky ship for it's cost.

As it is, an end game player fleet should be able to handle multiple enemy Paragons and Radiants, and depending on how steady your pressure is, along with the tactical situation, those kinds of ships can tank more than 75,000 damage per fight on their shields.  A flux neutral Paragon is at a minimum 41,666 shield (i.e. 25000/0.6) + 18000 hull + 1500 armor = 61,166 total to destroy in the absolute best case.  That's without defensive hull mods and ignoring fortress shield. A flux neutral Radiant is 63,166 minimum, but will jump out and vent if you don't pin it down.  If either of those two ship get a two vent cycles, they likely have tanked just as much as an Invictus which had spent 70 out of it's 240 OP on defensive hull mods.

Given it's a 60 DP low tech shieldless ship, I kinda would expect the level of hull survivability Alex is presenting here, otherwise it'd go pop way too fast for it's deployment cost.

I fully expect, like a Radiant or Paragon, you deal with the supporting ships first, then surround it and beat down over the course of 10-60 seconds, depending on weapon and missile selection.  In a player fleet I could see it being a long range Gauss sniper + HE bomber + MIRV loadout with a bunch of actually shielded ships running interference.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Gothars on March 20, 2022, 07:47:26 PM
Thanks for the blogpost Alex. I love the nod to the Orion project! Uniquifying the faction is a worthwhile goal, looking forward to it. Will it only apply to combat, or are also changes outside combat planned? The dialogs with the various generic commanders and fleets of each faction seem like a relatively easy way to show more of each faction's flavor, for example. Some variation in fleet behavior might also be interesting, like the TTs sending out tech mining fleets, or the church missionaries to other faction's planets, or the league having occasional in-fighting.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dri on March 20, 2022, 09:22:28 PM
We can't forget Invictus gets 100 OP refund from Heavy Ballistic Integration.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: TheLaughingDead on March 20, 2022, 11:49:10 PM
We can't forget Invictus gets 100 OP refund from Heavy Ballistic Integration.
Ahh, assuming one would use every ballistic slot. However, since the AI seems to take into account the Lidar Array range of the main weapon battery when deciding the range it will stick to, along with the somewhat gimped range from only a +25% range buff instead of Cap-grade ITU 60% buff, it seems that those non-battery weapons will not be firing nearly as often. Probably for the best though, as its flux dissipation wouldn't be able to handle the main battery's volleys along with, hell, even a bunch of Hellbores or Devastators.
I imagine the Invictus (despite all its tanking ability) will likely be behind the battle line delivering bursts of artillery fire, only occasionally exchanging fire with the enemy directly. However, if it finds itself caught off-guard, it is likely that its (better than Onslaught) speed and EMP resistance will allow it to retreat behind friendlies, or the support has all perished in fiery explosions and the Invictus is going to be ground down to dust from every angle anyway.

Personally already thinking about the potential of this beast. Although Gauss cannons sound nice, I'm thinking more along the lines of... Storm Needlers paired with Hellbores. After all, think about the drawbacks of these weapons:
Hellbores have slow fire rate, slow shot speed, low DPS. The former two of those problems are dealt with while using Lidar Array (to some degree at least) and the latter is made up for with Storm Needlers.
Storm Needlers have poor range and poor hit strength. The former issue is (somewhat) solved with the Array, in that they will at least be able to trade fire with most other Capital Large Ballistics (at 900 range with ITU). Worst case scenario, the Invictus has to take some hits to trade, but it definitely has the armour and hull to do so. The poor hit strength is of course patched up with the Hellbore's disgusting hit strength.
Both Hellbores and Storm Needlers are flux-efficient, which is definitely important depending on the duration for the Lidar Array, and they compliment each other well. Issue I might see is that the Hellbore rounds don't travel fast enough to hit anything smaller than a capital, but in that case a Hellbore could feasibly be swapped for an HAG (also give feeling of more dakka and warm fuzzies in chest). And the Kinetic and hull DPS of two Storm Needlers at 3x Fire Rate makes me salivate just thinking about it.
Okay, maybe I just really want to make Storm Needlers work, m'kay? Rotating guns are cool!
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Jackundor on March 21, 2022, 01:38:24 AM
i have some problems with basically every part of the update we have seen so far but i just want to say one thing:

don't make another midline cap to make the Diktat more Unique, just give them the Odyssey

with the exception of big bounties the Oddy is basically unused, it's too hard to aquire and the Lion's Guard have it as part of their doctrine in their .faction file already, they just don't know the BP

or alternatively make them go really hard on cruiser school
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 21, 2022, 02:13:01 AM
Odyssey seems more like an indie capital to me. It has exploration-related logistic hullmods and trades raw combat power for better campaign stats.

Quote
Altair Exotech licensed the Odyssey class to several frontier development corporations, including Eridani-Utopia, to provide admirably armed mobile survey headquarters and operation platforms

Diktat will probably become the exclusive owners of Conquest.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Jackundor on March 21, 2022, 02:39:22 AM
Odyssey seems more like an indie capital to me. It has exploration-related logistic hullmods and trades raw combat power for better campaign stats.

maybe, but Indies are the only (human) faction that doesn't have a cap, and that's probably for a reason

Diktat will probably become the exclusive owners of Conquest.
When Alex announced the Pegasus he specifically said that it would lead larger League fleets, so either they would go mostly cruiser school with a Battleship for their large fleets (which doesn't make that much sense) or have another new cap...
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 21, 2022, 02:43:52 AM
maybe, but Indies are the only (human) faction that doesn't have a cap, and that's probably for a reason

Indies have Conquest blueprints, they just rarely use it because they prefer cruiser spam.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Draba on March 21, 2022, 05:50:00 AM
The main thing missing for me was some ship variety, having extra hulls is very welcome.
The 1 nitpick I have is Invictus basically being a bunch of rule exceptions stacked on each other: Distributed fire control, LIDAR, Ablative armor, Vast hangar beyond the shield/canister flak switch.
Fine enough if that's what's needed to make the concept work, just seems like a minor usability problem similar to Ballistic rangefinder's arcane rules.

Also wanted to mention the Orion drive on the Retribution, just a "go forward" system but it was worth every second of development time.
Looks really cool.

Speculating on relative power seems a bit pointless without knowing more details details.
Something like a HIL Paragon probably eats any Invictus setup alive so wouldn't be too worried about it. HIL in general is the bane of shieldless ships.
Heph also gets another good use case.

I'm mostly curious about the problem Invictus could have:
it needs support for blocking/against flankers, but it's also a clumsy ship with forward mounts and burst firing windows in which it really, REALLY doesn't want allies to get in the way.
Will have to wait and see how that works out.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 21, 2022, 06:13:21 AM
The thing I am most concerned about Invictus is not the ship itself, but (assuming the ship is good enough to compete with other powerhouses) it probably wants an officer specialized for it, and only for it given its unusual properties.  Get Polarized Armor, Damage Control, and maybe Impact Mitigation.  Then, if I want to swap out the ship for an extended time, I probably want to fire the officer and get a new one with more useful skills for it.

Indies have Conquest blueprints, they just rarely use it because they prefer cruiser spam.
It makes it the easiest capital to steal the blueprints for because New Maxios has the worst defenses of any industry world (low defense, no patrols).
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on March 21, 2022, 09:06:36 AM
Thanks for the blogpost Alex. I love the nod to the Orion project! Uniquifying the faction is a worthwhile goal, looking forward to it. Will it only apply to combat, or are also changes outside combat planned? The dialogs with the various generic commanders and fleets of each faction seem like a relatively easy way to show more of each faction's flavor, for example. Some variation in fleet behavior might also be interesting, like the TTs sending out tech mining fleets, or the church missionaries to other faction's planets, or the league having occasional in-fighting.

There's some stuff we're very much looking at that's along these lines! But, it's not something I want to commit to ahead of time, and it's not really part of this effort at least as far as development goes, even if it would be part of it conceptually.


We can't forget Invictus gets 100 OP refund from Heavy Ballistic Integration.

(Not sure what aspect of this you're getting at here, but, just to make it very clear: it having HBI is a straight up nerf compared to it *not* having HBI; it started out minus HBI and plus 100 OP.)



The 1 nitpick I have is Invictus basically being a bunch of rule exceptions stacked on each other: Distributed fire control, LIDAR, Ablative armor, Vast hangar beyond the shield/canister flak switch.
Fine enough if that's what's needed to make the concept work, just seems like a minor usability problem similar to Ballistic rangefinder's arcane rules.

I get what you're saying, yeah. I try to be conservative with built-in hullmods in particular for this reason. The nice thing in this case is that some of the hullmods, at least, you don't need to really know the fine details of - they just smooth the rough edges so the ship "works". And it's a major combatant, so learning about it is more worth it.

Also wanted to mention the Orion drive on the Retribution, just a "go forward" system but it was worth every second of development time.
Looks really cool.

Cool! I wasa little on the fence about it for just that reason, but, just had to do it :)

I'm mostly curious about the problem Invictus could have:
it needs support for blocking/against flankers, but it's also a clumsy ship with forward mounts and burst firing windows in which it really, REALLY doesn't want allies to get in the way.
Will have to wait and see how that works out.

I think the improvements to ship AI - that are already in the current release, as far as ships trying harder not to get in your way - will help here. I'm sure it'll happen *some*, but just out of curiosity, I did a quick simulator test. An Invictor plus 8 or so frigates, with a "defend" order on it, vs a bunch of cruisers and other support ships. Just in this one test, it didn't get its firing lanes blocked even once.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 21, 2022, 09:09:15 AM
I think the improvements to ship AI - that are already in the current release, as far as ships trying harder not to get in your way - will help here. I'm sure it'll happen *some*, but just out of curiosity, I did a quick simulator test. An Invictor plus 8 or so frigates, with a "defend" order on it, vs a bunch of cruisers and other support ships. Just in this one test, it didn't get its firing lanes blocked even once.
Forget the actual blog post, this right here is huge news.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Twilight Sentinel on March 21, 2022, 11:27:01 AM
Diktat will probably become the exclusive owners of Conquest.

Agree with that.  The Dictate is currently the warship only faction.  The Odyssey fits the PL much better, as it's a battlecarrier ship.  Heck just making the Odyssey the PL's only capital ship and restoring their 3/3/1 breakdown for warships and carriers would do a lot to make them feel more unique.  Maybe increase how much they use hammerheads, sunders, Shrieks, Furies, and Apogees so the core of their fleets are those plus the herons they already prefer to field.  A mix of specialist, fast, and tanky midline/high tech ships backed up by strong carriers is a solid identity for a faction.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dri on March 21, 2022, 02:43:56 PM
Hopefully Part 2 comes quickly, this type of content really gets me going and excited for patch release.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amazigh on March 21, 2022, 06:24:00 PM
don't make another midline cap to make the Diktat more Unique, just give them the Odyssey
...
or alternatively make them go really hard on cruiser school
Currently in game we have one midline capital, compared to two for lowtech, three for hightech, and then one pather and one pirate (i consider those two different enough from the "standard" tech trees to be considered separately)
With the upcoming capitals (including the pegasus), that'll be 2 for midline, 4 for lowtech, and 3 for hightech.
That leaves midline as the clear option for where to add more capitals tbh.

And Alex flat out said that each faction is going to have distinct capitals, so that they will at least have a capital (be it new or old) will be a given tbh.

-----

In regards to the update, both of the new ships look really cool, and i really like the idea of each faction having more identity via what weapons they use.

One interesting thought i had, is that the Invictus is going to interact with Breach SRMs (and other "flat" armour damage weapons) in an interesting manner, as it will effectively be "resistant" to their bonus damage, and it might actually be (somewhat) more effective to use a more standard HE weapon to strip its armour than Breaches because of how the ablative armour works.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dri on March 21, 2022, 09:13:39 PM
I think the Odyssey is best kept as an Independent ship, it really doesn't scream hardcore military like the Diktat.

I'd like to see an elite battleship leaning more towards high tech for them, a powerful ship that would explain how they've managed to keep the Hegemony from crushing them thus far.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dread Pirate Robots on March 21, 2022, 09:36:43 PM
Looks amazing, I'm especially excited to get my hands on the Invictus... that said, is all this new weapon/ship content you've been showing off for a relatively small 0.95.2 release, or are we being tortured by something we won't be able to play with for over a year? (Of course I understand if this isn't an answerable question!)

This post has me hyped and I need to know how much I need to suppress it.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: TaLaR on March 22, 2022, 12:22:50 AM
@Alex
Invictus seems to stress test target ship's ability to time system use (as in, if target doesn't use mobility/defense system exactly right, it's dead or at least so massively disadvantaged, it will be soon). Any improvements to AI in that regard?

I'd particularly like to see AI's defensive use of Plasma Burn (turn at least partially broadside to threat it in advance, time PB to dodge). Otherwise AI Odyssey is just a big fat target.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 23, 2022, 05:38:55 AM
This is quite random for this blog post but it could kind of tie in somewhere. Reminded myself in another discussion that large energy slots only have 2 non beam options. And ships not meant for hit and run tactics pretty much just mainly need Plasma Cannon. Which is fine and all, great weapon either way, but having so few options after a plethora of ones in medium mounts feels awkward. I also thought large missiles were lacking some more interesting options and we know we're getting a bunch of them in the next patch, so that's taken care of. I just wish there was another thing that isn't a beam (I don't hate them or anything, but there's only so many things you can do with a beam loadout).
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 23, 2022, 06:31:15 AM
What would a third hard-flux large energy even look like though? We have high-flux high-damage plasma cannon and "budget" autopulse. Seems hard to come by with something third that doesn't feel like just tweaking numbers. Sharing the general purpose energy damage type naturally means less variation.

Might be interesting to make Mjolnir a hybrid weapon though.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 23, 2022, 06:45:51 AM
This is quite random for this blog post but it could kind of tie in somewhere. Reminded myself in another discussion that large energy slots only have 2 non beam options. And ships not meant for hit and run tactics pretty much just mainly need Plasma Cannon. Which is fine and all, great weapon either way, but having so few options after a plethora of ones in medium mounts feels awkward. I also thought large missiles were lacking some more interesting options and we know we're getting a bunch of them in the next patch, so that's taken care of. I just wish there was another thing that isn't a beam (I don't hate them or anything, but there's only so many things you can do with a beam loadout).
I rather have one good weapon than several that are mediocre.  It is pretty bad when the best assault weapon sometimes is a PD weapon, Heavy Burst Laser for medium energy mounts.

Large missiles are okay, between Locusts, Squalls, and MIRVs.  If anything, medium missiles sometimes frustrate me because the only good homing option (on a ship with limited rear-firing mounts to attack tailgaters) is Harpoon Pod because AI is way too conserve with Breach Pod (at least as much if not more so than Harpoon Pod).  Also, Harpoon Pod is the only damaging option for long-range sniper ships.  (Pilums are not damaging enough, usually.)

Might be interesting to make Mjolnir a hybrid weapon though.
Interesting as it might, it might offer too much range on the high-tech ships that can use it.  Now, if it has a special rule that lost 100 or 200 base range if mounted in an energy slot, then it could be an option.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 23, 2022, 06:47:41 AM
Smh thinking too inside the box. I would've never guessed we'd get a unique low tech battlecruiser yet here we are. Alex has a way of making crazy stuff seem balanced.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 23, 2022, 07:21:15 AM
Meh, I would rather not see the base game turn into its own mod. It's bad enough we'll have a special snowflake dreadnought with 4 unique hullmods.

And as far as outside the box goes, you can downsize mounts.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 23, 2022, 07:25:45 AM
Eh fair enough, but if we get factions that use high tech ships and then exclusive weapons, it's gonna be boring seeing capitals with Heavy Blasters and Autopulses (if they even get that blueprints).
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Ruddygreat on March 23, 2022, 07:40:27 AM
Seeing as the league & diktat are gonna be in the next blogpost - which one's gonna be properly getting the odyssey?

The league has it prioritised but doesn't know it & the diktat knows it but doesn't prioritise it (and TT also has it but they've already got 2 caps), it seems wierd that one of the few capitals isn't used by any of the major players.
My money's on the diktat getting it; a fancy ship with overdone officer's quarters feels like it'd fit right in for them.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 23, 2022, 07:55:56 AM
Eh fair enough, but if we get factions that use high tech ships and then exclusive weapons, it's gonna be boring seeing capitals with Heavy Blasters and Autopulses (if they even get that blueprints).
If we need extra weapons to make factions stand out, then yes, makes sense.  It may not be as critical for weapons.  We have several "poor" factions that use stuff acquired from the Open Market.

What I like to see is what the Independents will get.  Pirates and Pathers get their own stuff, and they are minor factions.  Similarly, the Remnants, although I guess they use Tri-Tachyon (if not Omega) stuff.  It would also be nice if the player can find some weapon and combat ship blueprints no other faction has.

It would be nice if more of the XIV ships were distinct from standard hulls aside from more flux and armor like Legion XIV, if more ships become Hegemony exclusive.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Draba on March 23, 2022, 08:48:17 AM
Reminded myself in another discussion that large energy slots only have 2 non beam options.
To be fair L energy also only has 2 beam options :)
Paladin is mostly PD, didn't get around to give it a proper try since it was changed so might be missing that it's decent against ships now.

Might be interesting to make Mjolnir a hybrid weapon though.
While hit strength and efficiency are below plasma, at a glance 900 range+EMP would probably make it too good on most things with L energy slots.
Just a guess ofc.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 23, 2022, 09:03:31 AM
Paladin is mostly PD, didn't get around to give it a proper try since it was changed so might be missing that it's decent against ships now.
Paladin is not that good against ships.  It underperforms compared to other large energy weapons at anti-ship.  Paladin is an anti-missile and maybe anti-fighter weapon.  Best to treat it like a dual flak with much more range that fits in a large energy slot.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 23, 2022, 09:16:25 AM
It would be nice if more of the XIV ships were distinct from standard hulls aside from more flux and armor like Legion XIV, if more ships become Hegemony exclusive.

Yes, this would be very welcome. The current "same hull but objectively better" situation discourages using base skins. I'll never s-mod a base enforcer, for example, because I know I will be using an orange version of it later.

While hit strength and efficiency are below plasma, at a glance 900 range+EMP would probably make it too good on most things with L energy slots.
Just a guess ofc.

I don't really know why long range is such a taboo for high tech. Conquest is fast as hell and allowed to kite with 2220 range gauss cannons, why is 1575 range Odyssey unacceptable then? Similarly, Falcons are about as fast as high tech stuff, yet they can use 1650 range kinetics.

EMP is what would make it stand out a little from plasma/autopulse. High tech already has easy access to ion damage, so I don't think it would break things either.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 23, 2022, 10:08:32 AM
I don't really know why long range is such a taboo for high tech. Conquest is fast as hell and allowed to kite with 2220 range gauss cannons, why is 1575 range Odyssey unacceptable then? Similarly, Falcons are about as fast as high tech stuff, yet they can use 1650 range kinetics.

EMP is what would make it stand out a little from plasma/autopulse. High tech already has easy access to ion damage, so I don't think it would break things either.
Mjolnir as synergy may be okay if it counts as Ballistic for buffs.  (So, no -10% flux from elite Energy Mastery.)  Still kind of leery of base 900 range hard flux on high-tech ships.  I would certainly kite further away with such high-tech ships.  Omega's improved Rift Cascading Emitter is quite powerful, not at max range, but it still explodes quite a bit a short distance before max.  I would love to kite with or otherwise abuse that weapon but player probably gets only one in the entire game.

Aside, Omega's Volatile Particle Driver not working with Heavy Ballistics Integration is a dealbreaker when otherwise considering it for Onslaught or other ships with HBI.  Not paying more than 10 OP extra for what is essentially a Storm Needler and Thumper hybrid.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Draba on March 23, 2022, 10:37:07 AM
I don't really know why long range is such a taboo for high tech. Conquest is fast as hell and allowed to kite with 2220 range gauss cannons, why is 1575 range Odyssey unacceptable then? Similarly, Falcons are about as fast as high tech stuff, yet they can use 1650 range kinetics.
I wrote ships with L energy mounts, not high tech.
Sunder's main drawback is that it's fragile, getting a 900 base range hardflux weapon with focus would be a big buff.
Apogee/Champion main drawback is being slow, same there. Quad Mjollnir Paragon would also be a real pain.

Gauss has atrocious turnrate, much lower DPS than Mjollnir, does little against armor and Conquest has really, really bad shields with mediocre armor.
It's nice for fire support but dual gauss Conquest and dual Mjollnir Odyssey aren't comparable, they do very different things.

+if Mjollnir keeps ballistic mastery bonuses it really starts stepping on plasma's toes (also 1665 range, not 1575 in that case).
If it counts as energy that's a pretty big nerf, it's already situational for the ships that can use it now.

Mjolnir as synergy may be okay if it counts as Ballistic for buffs.  (So, no -10% flux from elite Energy Mastery.)  Still kind of leery of 900 range on high-tech ships.  I would certainly kite further away with such high-tech ships.
Elite ballistic mastery would be obviously, no contest better for Mjollnir than elite energy IMO.
+90 range, +40/20 damage/hit, +33% projectile speed. It's generally a great skill.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dri on March 24, 2022, 11:20:25 AM
The Diktat needs a battleship that can compete with Paragon/Onslaught that embraces the energy/ballistic mix that is midline. Something like 2 large energy and 2 large ballistic mounts with decent flux stats.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Voyager I on March 24, 2022, 03:41:23 PM
I don't really know why long range is such a taboo for high tech. Conquest is fast as hell and allowed to kite with 2220 range gauss cannons, why is 1575 range Odyssey unacceptable then? Similarly, Falcons are about as fast as high tech stuff, yet they can use 1650 range kinetics.

The Conquest counterbalances its offensive potential by having one of the worst defensive profiles in the game, while the Falcon building around ballistic range has inferior firepower to destroyers.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 24, 2022, 04:20:32 PM
I don't really know why long range is such a taboo for high tech. Conquest is fast as hell and allowed to kite with 2220 range gauss cannons, why is 1575 range Odyssey unacceptable then? Similarly, Falcons are about as fast as high tech stuff, yet they can use 1650 range kinetics.

The Conquest counterbalances its offensive potential by having one of the worst defensive profiles in the game, while the Falcon building around ballistic range has inferior firepower to destroyers.
Yes, Conquest needs its long-range firepower to not be totally eclipsed by Onslaught.

I need to min-max armor hullmods and skills (plus get Shield Shunt for the always-on synergy with Polarized Armor) just to have Conquest strong and sturdy enough to be battleship-grade in a brawl, but I give up much (not enough OP left to get all the best-in-class missiles plus ECCM), and Onslaught is still better at it with the same armor min-maxing.

The Diktat needs a battleship that can compete with Paragon/Onslaught that embraces the energy/ballistic mix that is midline. Something like 2 large energy and 2 large ballistic mounts with decent flux stats.
If Hegemony gets Onslaught, Tri-Tachyon gets Paragon, Persean League gets Pegasus, and Church gets Invictus (and Remnants get Radiant), then what does Diktat get?  Conquest is too flimsy to be a battleship despite costing 40 DP.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: SafariJohn on March 24, 2022, 07:04:59 PM
Diktat gets Conlobsterquest - it's a Conquest, except it's blue and has 0.7 efficiency shield. Native to Volturn.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 25, 2022, 03:21:30 AM
I hope Diktat gets a battleship with large ballistics + large energies. IIRC only Prometheus has that combo in vanilla.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: FooF on March 25, 2022, 05:03:03 AM
I was being a little tongue-in-cheek with an earlier response of the Diktat having a rare/unique super-battleship, but only a little. It makes sense, lore-wise, for a megalomaniac to stroke his own ego and have the biggest and baddest flagship in the Sector. Basically, Ziggurat-esque and probably tied to the story somehow.

If the Diktat had a more conventional line Capital, I don’t even know what really fits the profile. Perhaps a midline battle carrier of some sort? Or, something related to their fuel monopoly? I guess whatever it is, it should be part of the elite Lion’s Guard and rare.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Resetium on March 25, 2022, 09:06:18 PM
I gotta be honest, my preference for tech types is usually high tech it's actually the robots but that's with mods to increased automated ship capacity, but this very well might make me cobble together (heh) a boatload of lowtech capitals just for the sheer space marines(?) feel of it (never enough dakka and all that).
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Delta_of_Isaire on March 26, 2022, 04:11:05 AM
Haven't read any of this thread so far, but just wanted to say that Uniquifying the factions is 10/10 for awesomeness and will really elevate Starsector to the next level.

Unique ship loadouts in particular is something I have high hopes for, both to increase tactical diversity and to hopefully increase the overall quality of NPC loadouts.



Also the Retribution looks really cool and I want to fly one
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on March 28, 2022, 08:54:19 AM
Dad it's been 10 days, when are you coming back for part 2?
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Twilight Sentinel on March 28, 2022, 11:59:46 AM
If the Diktat had a more conventional line Capital, I don’t even know what really fits the profile. Perhaps a midline battle carrier of some sort? Or, something related to their fuel monopoly? I guess whatever it is, it should be part of the elite Lion’s Guard and rare.
A battle carrier doesn't make sense for the Dictate.  Of all the main factions, they use the least carriers.  Instead the Dictate's theme sort of is lots of good quality warships with maximum firepower.  That isn't to say they couldn't use a fairly tanky warship intended to work with conquests or perhaps a missile focused capital that swarms the battlefield in a different way?
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dri on March 30, 2022, 01:30:20 AM
If the trend continues then Alex is going to give every major faction a battlecruiser/carrier and a battleship or something equivalent. Which is awesome.

Hege: Onslaught and Legion
Tri: Paragon and Astral
Ludds: Invictus and Retribution
Perseans: Pegasus and ???
Diktat: ??? and Conquest

I don't think Pirates and Pathers are major factions so they each get their janky Mk2 capitals—Independents are also a hard sell as a major faction.

So Persean League need a battlecruiser and Diktat needs a proper battleship. Where would Odyssey fit in best or perhaps Odyssey could be the token Independents capital ship?
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 30, 2022, 06:52:49 AM
In my dreams League is gonna get a megacarrier and Diktat a second battlecruiser. Following the same X+Y formula for all factions is the opposite of uniquifying.

Odyssey is for indies. I want to believe.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Dri on March 30, 2022, 01:52:53 PM
I think each faction getting a unique set of capitals is making things more unique already. But yes, it isn't like it HAS to be 1 battleship and 1 battlecruiser/carrier.

Getting new ships and weapons, especially some big bois, is really fun and exciting to me since I don't like playing with mod factions and weapons.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 30, 2022, 02:35:55 PM
Every major faction should have at least a battleship.  Otherwise, bounties with that faction's ships will be relatively easy to squish despite being DP equal to those with real battleships.

Pirates and Pathers have a capital, even if it is a modified civilian ship.

Independents should have something, either a battlecruiser or a carrier.  Having nothing but Dominators and Apogees is kind of annoying.

The one faction I like to see get some distinct unique combat ships (or at least be the only one in the sector who can build them) is the player faction.  Since player is sort of an offshoot of independents, the biggest ship does not need to be a battleship, but it would be nice to have few unique ships for your patrols.  (I do not consider Legion XIV unique since it is clearly a Hegemony themed hull even if Hegemony lost the blueprint.)

Diktat could have a modified Conquest (SD) that is strong enough to perform like a battleship instead of the squishy battlecruiser the stock Conquest is.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Amoebka on March 31, 2022, 03:37:11 AM
Unique player faction ships are a cool idea (that has come up a lot in the past), but having a few fixed presets wouldn't really fulfill that fantasy. Maybe visually you could have predefined sprites (so no runtime recoloring shenanigans), but the player gets to choose what aspect to change about the ship. So, for example, you have a steel-blue (default player color) Shrike sprite, but when you learn the blueprint, you get to choose one weapon mount to change to a different type, or something like that.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on March 31, 2022, 10:40:27 AM
Unique player faction ships are a cool idea (that has come up a lot in the past), but having a few fixed presets wouldn't really fulfill that fantasy. Maybe visually you could have predefined sprites (so no runtime recoloring shenanigans), but the player gets to choose what aspect to change about the ship. So, for example, you have a steel-blue (default player color) Shrike sprite, but when you learn the blueprint, you get to choose one weapon mount to change to a different type, or something like that.
The idea is no other faction has the ship, and it is not a mere reskin like Legion XIV is to Legion currently, but significantly altered like Condor vs. Tarsus at least, or a completely new ship.  It may not be what the player really wanted, but at least it sets him apart from other factions.

It does not need to a ship only the player ever uses.  Mercenaries could use it like they do for the phase civilians.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: leckford on April 03, 2022, 01:56:30 PM
Firstly, love the game, waiting semi-patiently for part 2

Love the new ships, was thinking about...

the ablative armour, and all the unique hullmods for invictus. I started to think maybe the Ablative armour could be a standard hullmod, something like x3 base armour, but damage reduction reduced by 90%, so then you could apply the same "antiquated" armour to say the onslaught. Tweek the hullmod (and invictus starting armour) so that it's always a nerf given the OP cost of the hullmod. Then people can see if it's "better" or not for themselves.

But then i though maybe for smaller hulls, it would actually be quite good still against larger weapons. Leading to maybe high-tech energy weapons could be the reason why ablative armour is no longer used, with energy weapons having a 50% (100%) bonus damage against it (or maybe work it into the damage reduction, -50% against ballistic and missle, -90% amount energy). Kinda the defenses are really good against low-tech ballistic and missle weapons, but the advent of high tech weapons forced a refit and redesign of armour systems.

The Invictus was too big and costly to refit/redesign and remains the only ablative armoured dinosaur left.

Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: DNAturation on April 03, 2022, 08:22:26 PM
For the Retribution as a low-tech battlecruiser, I think high base speed isn't needed, but could instead be replaced with high maneuverability (turn rate/acceleration). Might be fun if it's viable to simply fully turn your ship around and orion-pulse out mid fight when things look bad, since it's a nuclear explosion it could also be giving a middle finger as you delta out with a final attack. Would help to separate it out from being just a low-tech odyssey

For overall low-tech battlecruiser design, maybe sacrifice weapon range for maneuverability/speed instead of survivability for it could be an option. Running SO frigate/destroyers is pretty fun, having that as a capital ship level option could be interesting.

Also for identity it doesn't HAVE to be a unique capital ship... having a faction that fields an endless swarm of a unique annoying frigate design would be plenty memorable.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Igncom1 on April 05, 2022, 12:58:02 PM
A capital ship that's actually just 20 lashers taped together, with the special ability to come lose.  ;D
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Resetium on April 05, 2022, 06:37:05 PM
A capital ship that's actually just 20 lashers taped together, with the special ability to come lose.  ;D
Make them explosive Lashers.
You hit the thing once (or worse, it hits you), and YOU HAVE AWOKEN THE BEE'S NEST.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: wraithstalke on April 26, 2022, 04:35:32 PM
A capital ship that's actually just 20 lashers taped together, with the special ability to come lose.  ;D
Make them explosive Lashers.
You hit the thing once (or worse, it hits you), and YOU HAVE AWOKEN THE BEE'S NEST.

Ever played X2 the Threat? It had a similar enemy.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Resetium on April 26, 2022, 04:37:05 PM
A capital ship that's actually just 20 lashers taped together, with the special ability to come lose.  ;D
Make them explosive Lashers.
You hit the thing once (or worse, it hits you), and YOU HAVE AWOKEN THE BEE'S NEST.

Ever played X2 the Threat? It had a similar enemy.
I have never played X2 the Threat, but could you explain please?
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on April 27, 2022, 05:30:14 AM
Darn, I got excited and thought I somehow missed the part 2 coming out. Boy it sure has been a while since part 1, wink wink nudge nudge.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Alex on April 27, 2022, 06:53:29 AM
Actually working on it :D
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Twilight Sentinel on April 27, 2022, 06:37:51 PM
Actually working on it :D

Stares
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Space Cowboy on May 03, 2022, 12:30:18 AM
I'm unreasonably excited for the next update, thanks for the detailed blog posts!
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 03, 2022, 06:18:25 AM
I am Happy luddic church, persean league, and sindrian diktat have newer toys to play with

but after seeing the remnant fleet get 2 ships...
I can't tell whether it will be fun or painful
BUT A REMNANT SHIP THAT BEHAVES LIKE THE RETRIBUTION!?

EMPEROR I SHALL MAKE YOU PROUD TODAY BY RAMMING MY SHIPS ONTO THY ENEMY!!!
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Megas on May 03, 2022, 06:27:38 AM
A Remnant that will charge into weapons range of your ships and has no backward mobility (Nova) is much preferable to a brick that can easily escape to vent if it loses the flux war (Radiant).  Currently, the strength of an Ordos fleet can be measured in part by how many Radiants it has (and Radiants usually have alpha cores after the fleets have grown).  Radiants and AI cores make Ordos the challenge that they are.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 04, 2022, 07:03:29 AM
A capital ship that's actually just 20 lashers taped together, with the special ability to come lose.  ;D
Make them explosive Lashers.
You hit the thing once (or worse, it hits you), and YOU HAVE AWOKEN THE BEE'S NEST.

Ever played X2 the Threat? It had a similar enemy.
I have never played X2 the Threat, but could you explain please?

Bee's nest? you mean the khaak? yeah they were scary but i never encountered them in x3 but will hope to play x2 as there was the storyline quest i couldn't finish yet. still ships were fun to play especially the corvette's and fighters. personal favorite is the paranid hyperion, the yaki tenjin, and split enhanced chimera, for capital ships i go for pteranadon and ray
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Sahqovum on May 08, 2022, 01:26:20 PM
Anything for the Knights of Ludd in the works? Granted they only have a single base (and I don't recall ever seeing any fleets for them specifically) but it does seem like a missed opportunity considering a commission with the church names you a Knight if I recall correctly.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: wraithstalke on May 09, 2022, 07:27:57 PM
Ever played X2 the Threat? It had a similar enemy.
I have never played X2 the Threat, but could you explain please?

Basically a mid sized/small capital ship that exploded into a fighter squadron when it had taken a degree of damage.
I think it was about a half dozen light fighters and a heavy fighter.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: CrashToDesktop on May 19, 2022, 12:27:05 AM
Do we know the details of the Distributed Fire Control hullmod found on the Invictus and Retribution? The only solid thing so far that's been stated in the blog post is it blocks DTC and ITU from being installed, and that it increases weapon health. Does it increase weapon range at all, speed up repairs, or anything else?
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: Grievous69 on May 19, 2022, 12:36:10 AM
I doubt it increases weapon range, the part about Retribution specifically states that the idea is to keep its weapons short ranged. And the Invictus itself gets passive range bonus from its system, so yeah there's no way there are more range buffs.
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 21, 2022, 09:52:50 AM
Personally i prefer to have retribution short ranged after all that orion engine could prove situational as you can push ships to crash into each other and can be fun too. Despite there being space battles there isn't any means of utilizing ramming tactics or even boarding attempts added yet to the game
Title: Re: Uniquifying the Factions, Part 1
Post by: smithney on June 24, 2022, 01:13:27 AM
Glossing over the 'Accoutrements' section describing Invictus, I can't help but wonder what its logistics are going to be like. 4k crew is being mentioned later, but it's the supply and fuel economy I'm more curious about. The addition of 'Vast Hangar' makes me curious if omitting fighters to retain cargo space is going to be a viable option. If I suppose this hulk is going to have a huge sensor profile, did you consider the possibility of adapting it for exploration duty, Alex? Or do you want to hammer home its antiquity by making its logistics too unpractical outside the core?