At this point I feel like I should make yet another new thread, but for Eagle. Then again I'd surely be detected by the system as a bot or something.
And please include in your OP that the deployment cost is currently 20 in the dev build. I think that's crucial for this type of discussion.
How can Eagle be improved?The latter two. It needs a medium missile to punch up, and it needs a ballistic turret to deal with flankers. My suggestion is to change the middle ballistic hardpoint for a medium missile hardpoint, and then change the middle medium energy turret for a medium ballistic turret. This would actually turn the ship into a generalist - capable of doing everything, but not amazing at any of it. Also seems like a cool flavor thing - a midline cruiser that has a little bit of everything.
More speed?
More missiles?
Less awkward gun layout?
The latter two. It needs a medium missile to punch up, and it needs a ballistic turret to deal with flankers. My suggestion is to change the middle ballistic hardpoint for a medium missile hardpoint, and then change the middle medium energy turret for a medium ballistic turret. This would actually turn the ship into a generalist - capable of doing everything, but not amazing at any of it. Also seems like a cool flavor thing - a midline cruiser that has a little bit of everything.
Neither of the two can have an Ion Beam without sacrifices, so I guess that's something going for Eagle?Converted hangar Xyphos. Even of Eagle it's better than using ship-mounted Ion Beams, they have atrocious stats.
That's a nerf for how I use them. AI ship's main job in my fleet is distraction, stalling and picking off easy targets. I'll do all the heavy lifting myself.Any change that isn't a flat numerical is going to nerf some application while improving others. The missile hardpoint can even be a synergy if you insist, to keep the 3-3 possible. I don't think having 5 medium weapon mounts is a missile build with no endurance either.
Missile builds have terrible endurance for long battles against large fleets, so I don't use them.
Converted hangar Xyphos. Even of Eagle it's better than using ship-mounted Ion Beams, they have atrocious stats.Alex on his way to nerf Xyphos again because people refuse to use the god awful Ion beams 8)
How can Eagle be improved?
And please include in your OP that the deployment cost is currently 20 in the dev build. I think that's crucial for this type of discussion.
Is there a joke somewhere here that I don't get? Otherwise what you just said is pure nonsense, no one is running precisely 8 cruisers and nothing else in their fleets.And please include in your OP that the deployment cost is currently 20 in the dev build. I think that's crucial for this type of discussion.You have eight officers by default, max deployment is 240. 240 / 8 = 30, so any cruiser will fit if you want it to fit. Arguing about DP is almost purely academic even when comparing 20 and 25 DP ships, in case of 20 and 22 it's pure pedantry. And speaking of pure pedantry, Eagle should cost 21 DP because it's 133% of a Falcon which is 14 DP :)
I think he's trying to say that when it comes outfitting your cruisers, 2 DP isn't going to make a difference between them, because most of the time you're going to field at most 8 of them + padding. In other words, the 2 DP are going to be only significant when talking about endgame fleets. In your defense, if one's fielding 3 Eagles in their field, they'll be able to squeeze one more Monitor in addition to the usual stuff next patch, which does make a difference.You have eight officers by default, max deployment is 240. 240 / 8 = 30, so any cruiser will fit if you want it to fit. Arguing about DP is almost purely academic even when comparing 20 and 25 DP ships, in case of 20 and 22 it's pure pedantry. And speaking of pure pedantry, Eagle should cost 21 DP because it's 133% of a Falcon which is 14 DP :)Is there a joke somewhere here that I don't get? Otherwise what you just said is pure nonsense, no one is running precisely 8 cruisers and nothing else in their fleets.
That's a nerf for how I use them. AI ship's main job in my fleet is distraction, stalling and picking off easy targets. I'll do all the heavy lifting myself.
Missile builds have terrible endurance for long battles against large fleets, so I don't use them.
It really is the medium energy slots that are the problem here. Everything else about this ship makes it the most generalist cruiser to ever exist, which is a perfectly valid role. The medium energy slots just let it down. If you look at every single one of the medium energies, the problem is as clear as day.Which brings us to the elephant in the room: How do you make a medium sized weapon generally strong without making a hi-tech hull overpowered in the process? Because you can't let a hi-tech hull do high damage without a) making it exposed in short range; or b) making it opportunistic, thus only reliably dangerous in player's hands. Sunder and Champion solve this issue by having a system that boosts their energy power.
Out of the 8 options, half are support weapons, two are SO weapons, and two just plain suck. There is no middle of the road option.
The problem isn't with the Eagle, it is with medium energy, and with the energy vs ballistic split as a whole.
My solution: Either make the pulse laser not cheapo garbage, or to add a general-purpose weapon. A mini-Milojnir (without EMP) might be a good option.
And speaking of pure pedantry, Eagle should cost 21 DP because it's 133% of a Falcon which is 14 DP :)
Converted hangar Xyphos. Even of Eagle it's better than using ship-mounted Ion Beams, they have atrocious stats.Alex on his way to nerf Xyphos again because people refuse to use the god awful Ion beams 8)
It really is the medium energy slots that are the problem here. Everything else about this ship makes it the most generalist cruiser to ever exist, which is a perfectly valid role. The medium energy slots just let it down. If you look at every single one of the medium energies, the problem is as clear as day.
Which brings us to the elephant in the room: How do you make a medium sized weapon generally strong without making a hi-tech hull overpowered in the process?
I dont think cross-pollination between the tech niche's is that bad. We can already see similar cruiser rolls between ships like the Apogee & Champion, who serve as anchors, or Eradicator & Fury/Aurora which are fast assault cruisers.The thing is, Eagle is probably the least likely one to cross with hi-tech in a healthy way. It's slow and not particularly spiky. Falcon has the speed if not the bite, while Champion has the spikiness of a little Paragon. I'm of the opinion that Eagle should be its own thing, one that epitomizes midline. Midline's big thing is specialization, and what is the current midline lineup missing? The anchor. Midline does its damage on both the frontline and the backline, which means its anchor would just need to focus on the defenses. Which is why I suggested what I suggested: make it support well, or make it win flux wars in the middle of the battle as a generalist.
The eagle is just a generalist cruiser with nothing in a similar class and role to compare it against.
Essentially, you need to double down on beams being reasonable support weapons. One way you can do that is add additional perks, as opposed to raw damage, to beam weapons either inherently or via hullmod (like Advanced Optics). You'd think weapons with ranges of 1000+ITU+200 would be good, yet I don't see long range beam spam fleets being espoused as the greatest thing ever.I can agree with that. It would support the... support niche of the current medium energy wielders without making any of them overpowered. It also feeds nicely into my idea of Eagle being chiefly a support hull xD
I did like the idea of changing high scatter amplifier to another support beam hullmod instead of a hullmod which turns support beams into weapons which already kind of exist. Amusingly, Eagle can fit more beams, with more overlap, than a Fury can, at the soon to be same DP cost. A hullmod that made beams pass through allies (like the Paladin system) would turn Eagles (and Falcons) into the premier anti-fighter/long range anti-missile ships and give them an interesting cruiser escort role (along with Furies and Auroras). Probably would also want to throw on +10% beam damage or something given it doesn't actually help a solo ship, or even a small fleet.
Thankfully we're getting 2 new medium energy weapons next patch (although harder to acquire).One of them is a niche support beam and the other is overpriced inefficient SO bait. Medium energy is indeed not allowed to be good because high-tech exists.
The thing is, Eagle is probably the least likely one to cross with hi-tech in a healthy way. It's slow and not particularly spiky. Falcon has the speed if not the bite, while Champion has the spikiness of a little Paragon. I'm of the opinion that Eagle should be its own thing, one that epitomizes midline. Midline's big thing is specialization, and what is the current midline lineup missing? The anchor. Midline does its damage on both the frontline and the backline, which means its anchor would just need to focus on the defenses. Which is why I suggested what I suggested: make it support well, or make it win flux wars in the middle of the battle as a generalist.
Which brings us to the elephant in the room: How do you make a medium sized weapon generally strong without making a hi-tech hull overpowered in the process?
Is there a joke somewhere here that I don't get? Otherwise what you just said is pure nonsense, no one is running precisely 8 cruisers and nothing else in their fleets.
They wouldn't be overpowered because of how few medium slots high-tech ships get. Fury has 1.5, Aurora has 2.5 because the fourth one is pointing backwards so it's practically missile exclusive. High-tech ships are already designed with medium energy weapons being stronger than ballistic equivalents in mind - except they're not stronger outside of in-your-face Safety Overrides builds.It's the opposite. High-tech ships get better base flux stats to compensate for their weapons being less efficient, and higher base speeds to compensate for shorter ranges.
Even with 25 DP per cruiser eight cruisers leaves you with 40 DP left and at that point all you need is something to quickly take two points(assuming closest is taken by the cruisers) to get everything on the field.There's a very big difference between fielding 8 cruisers + 40 dp of escorts and fielding 8 cruisers + 80 dp of escorts. DP is one of the most important metrics of gauging ship strength. You are effectively comparing power/DP ratios.
I dont think the eagle should be tanky. That would defeat the purpose of it being a generalist cruiser, which is not supposed to have any strong traits other than that its a generalist. Giving it a fancy new subsystem, upgrading its armor and so on would be against the entire point. About the only idea I could give would be to give it a fighter bay and some OP to mount a fighter wing for free, so it can field a wing of fighters like Thunder's, which would allow it to engage any variety of targets and be able to recall back to defend itself.I didn't mean it should be tanky. A ship can defend itself with mobility and disarming the foe as well. Eagle's mobility system, viable supportive medium energy weapons and even a fighter bay are all options to be tried before shields or armor changes are considered.
Btw a nitpick: Subsystem is a component of a ship, like a hinge to a door or a transmission to a car. I believe you meant a (fancy new) ship system ^^
It's the opposite. High-tech ships get better base flux stats to compensate for their weapons being less efficient, and higher base speeds to compensate for shorter ranges.
There's a very big difference between fielding 8 cruisers + 40 dp of escorts and fielding 8 cruisers + 80 dp of escorts.
They have higher flux dissipation but also have higher shield upkeep. The end result is usually same amount of free flux as midlines. Fury has 420 free flux, Eagle has 390. Where's the big advantage that lets Fury use all those flux-hungry weapons?You've just given the counterexample yourself. Eagle has higher shield upkeep relative to dissipation. Fury used to be 15 DP, which is why the stats are on the lower side. Most people agree it was overnerfed when pushed to 20 dp.
As for speed, that only matters when you pilot a ship 1v1 in Simulation. Even AI in Simulation(also 1v1) cannot properly take advantage of speed because it's just too timid.
Yes, the difference in how many escorts you'll lose because you can't babysit all of them. Once battles get big enough to start spawning objectives anything smaller than a cruiser becomes a liability(barring obvious exceptions like the Monitor)
I think the long-range support options are fine as-is. Its a ship you use to harass the flanks and punch down frigates and the like. Having to exist in a tactical vacuum where your enemies and options can change make it a very good ship for campaign, though not so helpful when you gotta knock down a station.
Essentially, you need to double down on beams being reasonable support weapons. One way you can do that is add additional perks, as opposed to raw damage, to beam weapons either inherently or via hullmod (like Advanced Optics). You'd think weapons with ranges of 1000+ITU+200 would be good, yet I don't see long range beam spam fleets being espoused as the greatest thing ever.
Maybe there should be a character skill and/or mid-tech hullmod (possibly built-in) that makes energy + ballistic combo more viable? Maybe specifically beams + ballistic. Because as skills and mods exist right now, you want a ship to specialize in either ballistics (any range) or short to medium range energy weapons.I would prefer Eagle to be good out of the box.
What about a system that lowers the flux cost and raises the range of energy weapons? And also allows beams to pass over targets while active? Say similar duty cycle to AAF (35% uptime but a nice long burst on activation), increases the base range of all energy weapons by 25% (up to a maximum? Needed?), reduces flux cost by 25%, allows beams to pass over.I don't think that this approach on its own would differentiate Eagle enough from its competitors, namely Champion. I also wonder how would AI handle the opportunistic approach to medium energy. It would probably feel better in player's hands, as they could abuse the window granted by such system to employ flux-inefficient burst weapons, but that doesn't usually translate well to AI. At this point don't forget that Eagle is supposed to be the core of 3 (or 2.5 if you insist :P ) different AI fleets.
Give it 70 base speed and Active Flare LauncherBeat me to it -_- :D
/thread
How is there nothing to support an Ion Beam, there's literally 3 ballistics lol. But the problem with Ion Beam is its flux cost.
Ion Pulser is great even for non-SO ships, Eagle is just a bad ship for it.
Pulse Laser was actually buffed recently to 1.0 flux efficiency. It has its uses, unfortunate part is that cruisers don't want it if they want to actually deal damage to other ships bigger than a Hammerhead.
Thankfully we're getting 2 new medium energy weapons next patch (although harder to acquire).
This is how I build mine. Replace the LRPDs with regular PDs though, I've found the extra range really doesn't help that much with the frontal facing ones, if anything it hurts them as Annihilator Rocket bursts will distract them a lot.Please put giant images in spoiler tags, thanks! (Or crop to just the relevant section of the screenshot. Or both! Both is good.)
This build works best with a Steady fleet doctrine and Steady officers, it's obviously not a high DPM build but it's a good 'line cruiser' and it'll hold it's position well enough against most ships. 4 Atropos isn't a lot, but it's enough to be a finisher when the AI needs it."giant image"(https://i.imgur.com/npa0urh.png)[close]
You've just given the counterexample yourself. Eagle has higher shield upkeep relative to dissipation. Fury used to be 15 DP, which is why the stats are on the lower side. Most people agree it was overnerfed when pushed to 20 dp.
I don't want to sound unkind, but most of your statements are the opposite of what is considered common sense among the experienced players. Speed is a very (if not the most) important stat. Getting closer quick means less time tanking damage without being able to trade back.
Extra DP can be used on ANY unofficered ships, even more cruisers if you insist.
...Hence the reckless personalities, so they'll stay in front and do their job...
And the feeling of bewilderment is definitely mutual. Sometimes I wonder if we play the same game(which is a surprisingly valid question given the prevalence of mods) Or if you people playtest your ideas with AI at all.Sorry if it seems like I'm talking from some sort of a high ground but you're asking people who play this game for many years, fine tuning their builds and arguing here about everything, if they test different loadouts with AI... We've had literal AI tournaments (still have) where a bunch of players would send their fleets and then fight each other. Sure someone is always going to say something dumb but it's a bit out of place to tell the veterans "are we playing the same game here?".
I'd even agree with you and say speed is not the most important stat, but it's the clear second one. Without any speed, you're bound to get swarmed and kited to death. Would you still field 8 Eradicators if they had 40 speed?
Give it 70 base speed and Active Flare Launcher
/thread
Please put giant images in spoiler tags, thanks! (Or crop to just the relevant section of the screenshot. Or both! Both is good.)This makes me wish the game had an "export fit to clipboard" function that's also readable. Like in EVE online.
Or let me put it this way: if in the next patch Eradicator was bumped from 20 to 25 DP I would STILL field eight of them as it's the only cruiser worth a damn.Lol.
@Goumindong
Falcons punch down very well - they are both longer ranged and faster than most destroyers (only Shrike and Medusa are faster), have good stats for 14 DP, and are maneuverable enough to track small targets with their front guns.
I’ve been a big proponent of adding a flight deck + 15 OP to the Eagle but the thread has me thinking about something sort of fundamental brought up earlier: why does the Eagle need to be slow? Why can’t it straight up be better than the Falcon? I.e. make it like 75 base speed with Maneuvering Jets?I think it boils down again whether Alex wants Eagle to be a better support, or become a generalist again. I'm more inclined to believe the latter. It's not just a matter of feeling good in players hands, they will have to feel good to fight against. Judging by the screenshots in the blog posts, neither SD nor Hegs are fielding Eradicators or Champions, both are fielding Eagles and Falcons*.
I would not like Eagle to get a fighter bay beacuse then you should put mining pod or xyphos in it otherwise the ai cannot use them normally. Ai with battlecarriers is really lacking right now.I had the same thought when posting in that thread about the Legion earlier. We need more short range fighter wings that cater to battlecarriers. Making the Eagle a battlecarrier by taking up the fighter bay & +15 OP buff would incentivize Alex to make more of those.
Making the Eagle a battlecarrier by taking up the fighter bay & +15 OP buff would incentivize Alex to make more of those.Oh I doubt it will, iirc the current state of fighters is giving Alex enough headaches as it is. If Eagle gets a fighter bay, we're less likely to see a new carrier rather than more. Regarding fighter variety, I think the pool's already large enough, save perhaps for another Support LPC.
Falcons and Eagles should, almost always, be given harass orders on enemy capitals or heavy cruisers.
While fast Eagle sounds nice, I struggle to see how it wouldn't simply obsolete Falcon. Falcon's shtick has always been "Eagle, but faster, cheaper, and less armed".
Personally I find reducing Eagle's DP to 20 to be lame, and as others have said it doesn't make me want to use the ship any more than before.
Falcons and Eagles should, almost always, be given harass orders on enemy capitals or heavy cruisers.
Can you pick which ship you want to do the harassing? Whenever I use harass on an enemy, the game dynamically chooses which ship (I think it actually says frigate) will be sent to harass.
Falcons are already a pain enough to fight. I cannot imagine also having to deal with Eagles that kite at that speedI feel like that would make the Persean League rather top heavy considering they embody cruiser school ideas the most and this would greatly benefit them.
I could see giving the Eagle a flight deck but I think I would rather just see it be cheaper. It’s OK to have some “only marginally OK” ships so long as they’re priced right and the 3 DP to upgrade to the champion is just a no-brainer when it might not be at 5. There would be a good progression if the Falcon was 14, the Eagle was 20, and the Champion was 25.
There has been power creep (and the Eagles primary advantage has been nerfed when HVD/maulers were brought back in line) but there still ought to be power disparity between different ships of the same class
I would be more amenable to logistics upgrades to make the ship easier to field as opposed to power upgrades. Built in. Nah Relay, or something new, call it “dynamic logistics components”* or something. Or “standardized design”**
*the primary component of cruiser school fleets this ship was to be a valuable addition to any size fleet as a result the systems were designed such that they could accept replacement parts from many different ships. This makes it exceptionally easy to repair and recover from deployments. Supply cost to recover from deployments is reduced by 25%
**designed first and foremost to be a ship that was easy to operate many components of this ships controls and operations were taken (and upgraded or streamlined) from successful and ubiquitous ships of the past. Flight controls from the Tarsus. Engine controls from the Gemini. Fuel containment and cooling from the star liner. Almost all prospective crew will already have deep knowledge of one ship system before they come aboard. Maximum Combat readiness is increased by 10%
I feel like that would make the Persean League rather top heavy considering they embody cruiser school ideas the most and this would greatly benefit them.
A speed boost for the eagle and falcon would feel nice though. Falcon's pretty flighty as it is which means it will zoom around the map, though not without competition from other similar high-tech cruisers. The Eagle would feel less cumbersome if it was faster, which I think would give it a distinct advantage as a support ship, considering with maneuvering jets and increased speed will see them dodge alot of stuff much easier.
In a thread heavy on vibes and opinions, here's a post with (1) a concrete fit (2) definition of combined-arms fleet role (3) video evidence of AI-friendliness."video"here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liRIRTJK8tw)[close]
With the excess of medium ballistics and energies I would argue that the eagle is best used as an SO ship.Yeah, and at the same time there are other hulls in the same ballpark that are better as SO ships than Eagle is.
The eagle is already pretty good as an AI controlled SO ship. Above is video of an reckless AI controled eagle wailing on a dominator, note that this test was done with a reckless ai and no officer or fleet wide skills. Take a few of these and anything with homing missiles and you've got a pretty decent fleet. If the eagle is going to get more buffs, they probably shouldn't be to its base stats or system, with its current stats, buffs like that would risk making it an Aurora that costs 8 less dp. Maybe something like a built in hullmod that gives it the capital range bonus for installing targeting core hullmods.
In a thread heavy on vibes and opinions, here's a post with (1) a concrete fit (2) definition of combined-arms fleet role (3) video evidence of AI-friendliness.
In a fleet with bombers and MRMs that fit's a killer front line hammer. Add officer and kinetic+EMP will go brrrrrr.
Gold standard for ship balance discussion imo.
The thing is, Eagle is probably the least likely one to cross with hi-tech in a healthy way. It's slow and not particularly spiky. Falcon has the speed if not the bite, while Champion has the spikiness of a little Paragon. I'm of the opinion that Eagle should be its own thing, one that epitomizes midline. Midline's big thing is specialization, and what is the current midline lineup missing? The anchor. Midline does its damage on both the frontline and the backline, which means its anchor would just need to focus on the defenses. Which is why I suggested what I suggested: make it support well, or make it win flux wars in the middle of the battle as a generalist.
We can already see an example of a high-tech cruiser with generalist functions anyways if you look at the remnant and they perform so-so without an AI officer. Thats not to say it should be done, but we have a working example of it, so its not unreasonable to think there could be a smooth transition.
I dont think the eagle should be tanky. That would defeat the purpose of it being a generalist cruiser, which is not supposed to have any strong traits other than that its a generalist. Giving it a fancy new subsystem, upgrading its armor and so on would be against the entire point. About the only idea I could give would be to give it a fighter bay and some OP to mount a fighter wing for free, so it can field a wing of fighters like Thunder's, which would allow it to engage any variety of targets and be able to recall back to defend itself.
Give it 70 base speed and Active Flare LauncherTHIS
/thread
I was being goofy, obviously I'd hate for it to get a boring system. But the thread went in a "speed buff speed buff" direction I posted a satirical comment that isn't even that crazy when you think about it.It really isn't. If it's supposed to be - to quote: "at the core of military fleets headed for battle" then it could really use a system to make it more survivable, if not just a straight speed buff to make it a one-and-a-half Falcon. Because at this point the idea that it's a line battle cruiser is laughable.
One downside of giving Eagle a fighter bay would be that its energy mounts would be even less relevant.
A random idea: give the Eagle an extra maybe 600 flux dissipation - and a built-in hullmod that doubles the DPS of beam weapons, but also triples their flux costs.Like the guy said... people would probably just mount heavy blasters instead.
Since the Eagle can already carry 1000-range weapons thanks to its ballistic slots, we don't have to worry so much about the long range of beams being oppressive; the Eagle can afford to buff its beam weaponry without becoming overpowered, and the flux cost increase should be roughly balanced with the extra dissipation. While at the same time, that extra dissipation also makes it more reasonable to use pulse lasers or even a heavy blaster or two.
I'm not sure how much this would help, but it is at least something that should be easy to try out...
...
The Eagle and Falcon are just vehicles for HVD's. That's what they're good for. They put hard flux on far-away targets and flit away from return fire. The only difference between the Eagle and the Falcon is that the Falcon actually succeeds at this task because the Eagle is too slow and can't tank to compensate.
...
Heavy Blasters, plural? I think you're underestimating the flux costs of heavy blasters, and over-estimating the base flux dissipation of an Eagle. Well, that, or assuming you'll be using SO.I think you are underestimating how much 600 dissipation is lol. Eagle can already borderline run one heavy blaster (I kind of want to try something like 3x arbalest + HB now). Even more terrifying would be HB + cryo blaster behind 3x medium kinetics.
What it would do, now that I experiment a bit, is put the Eagle into an interesting state where there are actually some decent non-SO builds that don't max out on flux vents.
Yeah not every Eagle build has to be a sniper, although that one is the safest.I like that actually, although I think I would run 3x kinetics and maybe try to squeeze an ion pulser in somewhere.
The build from my current campaign which seems to do alright. Specifically didn't put Advanced Optics because I want it to commit more and not waste beams on side targets.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/R1x560X.png)[close]
flux regulation (50 more from vents, then everything x1.1)Just to clarify a mistake here: Flux Regulation is not 'everything' times 1.1. It is, instead, based solely on the ship's base flux dissipation - so it's an extra +60 for a normal eagle, or possibly up to +120 for my suggested improved Eagle, if the extra dissipation is built into the hull rather than added as an effect of the suggested hullmod.
So yes, with skills, you could then fit two heavy blasters on a non-SO Eagle, so +600 is probably too much, which in turn means that tripling the flux cost of beam weapons is also probably too much. 2.5x normal flux costs for 2x normal damage, maybe? Numbers can certainly be tinkered with, but I think the core idea is still a decent one: making beam weapons stronger-but-more-expensive, coupled with a dissipation boost to offset the 'but-more-expensive' part to both buff the normal use of the hull and make blaster or pulse laser builds more attractive.I get what you're going for, but beams already have a niche they fit into on the eagle. I'd like to see it actually be able to use projectile energy weapons outside of SO.
You're right, though, that I was looking at an un-skilled Eagle, and comparing to other un-skilled ships, in large part because I was running combat tests against the simulator and putting a ship with full skills into the simulator does not give you particularly useful results. Why yes, an Eagle with a highly skilled officer can make an unskilled enemy Dominator melt. Is that useful information? No, no it is not.
So yes, with skills, you could then fit two heavy blasters on a non-SO Eagle, so +600 is probably too much, which in turn means that tripling the flux cost of beam weapons is also probably too much. 2.5x normal flux costs for 2x normal damage, maybe? Numbers can certainly be tinkered with, but I think the core idea is still a decent one: making beam weapons stronger-but-more-expensive, coupled with a dissipation boost to offset the 'but-more-expensive' part to both buff the normal use of the hull and make blaster or pulse laser builds more attractive.
I like the idea of giving the Eagle that "Energy Bolt Coherer" hullmod, or whatever it's called. +200 range to non-beam energy weapons like the Pulse Laser and Heavy Blaster.
That would work better than the hangar slot, I think. Give the Eagle +10 top speed, built-in Energy Bolt Coherer, and +15 OP. All those buffs might even make it overpowered.
The discussion about Energy Bolt Coherer leads me to ask, does the Pulse Laser need a buff? It's a 600 range medium energy weapon with 300 DPS and 300 flux/sec. I think the DPS/FPS ratio should be higher. I never use the Pulse Laser for that very reason, I'm trading 300 FPS for 300 DPS and it's not even being traded at a high range. It reminds of the Tactical Laser. 75 DPS/75 FPS, not a good weapon, but at least it has a range of 1000.
Give the Eagle +10 top speed, built-in Energy Bolt Coherer, and +15 OP.
EditWell that's what we've been saying...
So this is kind of embarrassing, but I only just now noticed something. A while ago I had buffed the base speed/acceleration of the eagle to match the champion as an experiment, and I thought I changed it back afterwards but apparently I use the eagle so little I didn't notice that I actually nerfed the champion rather than the eagle. If there's a buff the eagle needs (beyond a dp change), it'd be 10 top speed/acceleration/deceleration to match the champion's base stats. Having changed them back the eagle wins this battle far less often.
you've got a monstrosity mounting arbalests (I can't remember the last time I used them)Do not speak ill of the mighty arbalest. As you can see, I have maxed out the dissipation on my eagle and it barely has enough flux for its guns. The arbalest is cheap and efficient, it's almost got the same stats as the railgun but lower flux cost and higher damage per shot.
Obviously a maxed out Eagle XIV isn't exactly the standard here, but it did beat the sim onslaught head-on under AI control. A standard eagle would probably fail, but that's roughly what I'd expect from a 20 dp cruiser.
Edit
So this is kind of embarrassing, but I only just now noticed something. A while ago I had buffed the base speed/acceleration of the eagle to match the champion as an experiment, and I thought I changed it back afterwards but apparently I use the eagle so little I didn't notice that I actually nerfed the champion rather than the eagle. If there's a buff the eagle needs (beyond a dp change), it'd be 10 top speed/acceleration/deceleration to match the champion's base stats. Having changed them back the eagle wins this battle far less often.
Not sure what this test is supposed to say about the Eagle. A 12 DP destroyer can provide the same performance. I setup an SO Medusa with a level 6 officers and fleet boosting skills and it killed the sim Onslaught in 120 seconds under aggressive AI control.Yeah any ship can beat an onslaught if you get behind it. My point was the eagle didn't do that, it won from the front which is pretty unusual. That being said it was working in fleet scenarios against end game threats, but that was with the speed boost, so I can't say for sure now. I'd assume that if an s-modded version with a proper officer can work against the redacted than a normal one would work against normal enemies.
At the end of the day, fitting makes a gigantic difference in the effectiveness of ships. Similarly, throwing in campaign skills against targets without is also a huge multiplier, like more than a factor of 2 in effectiveness.
The question at the end of the day is not, can I build a cruiser to beat a sim Onslaught, but how effective is it when properly utilized in a fleet situation when compared against it's peers. Simply because frigates can beat the sim Onslaught under AI control when given access to officer skills and fleet bonuses. Like, that's a bar that 8 DP ships can cross, let alone 12 or 22 DP cost ships.
This is why I like encouraging others to do tests themselves, as well as taking videos or images with a grain of salt, since it's not always clear if there are under the hood changes, intentional or not. Yeah, 61 speed Eagle is in fact 10 faster than my Eagle XIV with a Helmsmanship officer. Thanks for clarifying.It's slightly amusing to me when people suggest radical changes to a ship and feel very strongly about it when you can often just test it yourself if you think it's a good idea. A lot of these numbers are just sitting in an excel spreadsheet the game draws from. Just.... remember to change them back afterwards. Or don't. I'm keeping the eagle at 20dp.
I think it's worth noting that the medusa wouldn't be able to get behind an onslaught in a real battle without getting balsted, while an eagle face tanking the front of an onslaught is a much more realistic scenario.
Replace the Eagle with a Champion with the same kind of s-mods and officer, and equip it with a Plasma Cannon, 2 Heavy Needlers, and 2 ion cannons, and it'll actually cause the Onslaught to be pushed back before destroying it (unlike the speed 60 Eagle which was basically backing up the whole time). The Champion is much better at actually holding a line while dishing damage.Yeah there's not any reason to use an eagle over a champion right now, whether we're talking long range or short range builds. A large energy with HEF is miles better than 3 mediums, and it gets a large missile, and it's got 25% more armour and hull. For just 3 more dp it's a no brainer. Dropping the eagle to 20 dp helps a lot, but I'm leaning towards a speed buff as well. The eagle fills a half-way spot between the falcon (light cruiser) and the champion (heavy cruiser) but it doesn't seem quite fast enough to fill that spot. Besides that I don't think it needs any radical changes to its design like switching the mounts or adding a fighter bay because its core identity is not fundamentally broken like the op suggested, it's just undertuned.
Yeah there's not any reason to use an eagle over a champion right now, whether we're talking long range or short range builds. A large energy with HEF is miles better than 3 mediums, and it gets a large missile, and it's got 25% more armour and hull. For just 3 more dp it's a no brainer. Dropping the eagle to 20 dp helps a lot, but I'm leaning towards a speed buff as well. The eagle fills a half-way spot between the falcon (light cruiser) and the champion (heavy cruiser) but it doesn't seem quite fast enough to fill that spot. Besides that I don't think it needs any radical changes to its design like switching the mounts or adding a fighter bay because its core identity is not fundamentally broken like the op suggested, it's just undertuned.
The Champion cannot put out as much long term net shield pressure due to its lower flux, generally less efficient and lower range weapon set, and higher recoil on the weapons for which it would put out kinetic. Nor does it have the reasonable space to put an Ion Beam and if it does it has to give up a tachyon lance for it. Which is nominally a point in its favor but it does significantly reduce the net shield pressure each can put out.You could argue the ability to mount a squall negates all of that.
While the champion is a good ship it simply is not as efficient at shield pressure as the Eagle. Not in total and not per DP. And while i agree the eagle could be priced lower. That does not mean that there aren't situations i would not choose an eagle over a Champion and an Eagle over a Falcon for that matter.
I had not thought about the squall, though that also complicates the actual build. It puts you ~40 kinetic damage over the Eagle until the squall runs out (assuming similar accuracy from the eagles main guns and the champions, which is not a good assumption due to the recoil assumption)I mean... 1 large energy is gonna cost you about the same as 3 mediums, if not less. In theory, yeah, the eagle is the best choice for a war of attrition, but right now it doesn't do its job well enough for the cost. Champions will pound the enemy into scrap with large missiles and just end the fight faster while falcons have the speed to stay safe. I would happily include either in a fleet but not the eagle unless it gets buffed.
But if you do mount a squall then youve got some significant fitting considerations ahead of you. Because the Champion only has 165 OP as compared to the eagles 155.
So after the eagle fits 3 HAC and the Champion fits 2 HAC and 1 Squall... They have the same OP left while the Champion has its large energy to fit and the eagle can dedicate the rest of its fit to the Ion Beam and point defense.
Again, not to say the eagle is explicitly better. But if you want a ship that can hold the line as long as possible from as many different enemies as possible, the eagle is it.
The Eagle has 600 base dissipation and the champion 550. They’re both cruisers and so get the same base set and the champion only has 10 more OP to fit more and larger guns. How can you afford premium options on the champion but not the Eagle?Because it has more mounts. You aren't going to run x3 heavy needler x3 pulse laser on an eagle. You might run x2 heavy needler + heavy mortar + x2 graviton + x1 ion beam, though. My point is you can't run premium in every slot so you have to compromise. In a vacuum this is better than having fewer mounts and running premium, but the champion has that plus a large missile and HEF. Not to mention how good large energies are compared to mediums.
Because it has more mounts. You aren't going to run x3 heavy needler x3 pulse laser on an eagle. You might run x2 heavy needler + heavy mortar + x2 graviton + x1 ion beam, though. My point is you can't run premium in every slot so you have to compromise. In a vacuum this is better than having fewer mounts and running premium, but the champion has that plus a large missile and HEF. Not to mention how good large energies are compared to mediums.
You may like the champion better than the Eagle and that is fine. It may fit better in your fleets and that is fine.I never disliked the eagle, I just never used it. Now that I've messed around with it I kinda like its awkward weapon layout but I wouldn't keep one around in the end game because it just doesn't carry its weight in DP. With a couple tweaks it should be fine. -2 DP and +10 speed/acceleration won't fundamentally change the ship but it would make it much more appealing without going overboard.
But that doesnt mean it doesn’t have a use or that it doesn’t have value for others. And if you only think about what you want to fit you will miss the value you can bring.
The 3 HAC Eagle provides more shield pressure than the champion (due to accuracy) for longer and for less DP.
The 3 HAC Eagle provides more shield pressure than the champion (due to accuracy) for longer and for less DP.That is just not true...
The 3 HAC Eagle provides more shield pressure than the champion (due to accuracy) for longer and for less DP.That is just not true...
I just typed out all the numbers, I'm not going to again. 2x HAC (or needlers) + plasma cannon + squall (a realistic champion build) does the same shield DPS as 3x HAC + 3x pulse laser (a completely overfluxed eagle build designed to max shield DPS). The non missile DPS (2x HAC + plasma) is 300+ more shield DPS than 3x HAC. So if you run beams in medium slots on eagle, you are way behind on hard flux shield DPS. 2x gravitons + ion beam is like just keeping up on total shield DPS (ignoring squalls and ignoring that some of the eagle damage is soft flux lol).
You could also run autopulse and IR pulse lasers (or even a volatile particle driver) to further max out shield DPS on champion. But I think plasma being amazing hull/armor DPS is much more valuable. The fact that the champion build can kill stuff easily and that eagle has terrible hull/armor DPS while just keeping up on shield DPS, is also kind of telling.
Things get better for the Eagle with pilot skills because while there are two skills that boost ballistic range there is only one that boosts energy.You are really fixated on those HAC's eh? I'm not exactly sure how to tell you this, but you haven't explained at all how your build deals with armour. Don't tell me you're relying on 2 small missiles on a cruiser.
So if you want that Plasma cannon you’ve got split skills on you officer. The plasma cannon is sitting at 750x1.55 for 1162 range but the HAC are at 800 x 1.65 for 1320 range. That is a pretty significant band (which you kinda need hard points to take advantage of due to recoil) and while there are things that you can add to the champion to negate that they’re not more efficient in general. If you do pick this skill for your champion pilot you’ve got to contend with the gap, which is fine but you also lose relative efficiency because all three front kinetic ballistics on the Eagle all benefit from that skill.
If we make the consistent with shield comparison you have 976 (1500 before missiles run out) on the champion and 1302 for the Eagle without the graviton beams…. [1408 with the graviton beams hella not worth go for PD]
This is like. An actual huge difference considering the Eagle is more accurate due to recoil and squall while not the easiest missile to shoot down still is a missile you can shoot down
The Champion, with a flux distributor, has 940 flux. If it has 2 HAC and a Plasma Cannon its got 428 Flux from the HAC and 825 flux from the Plasma Cannon. This nets a long term total weighted shield DPS of 1204. Plus 512 for the squall while it lasts. Makes 1716. This assumes its shield is not raised. You get a bit more out of HEF but not enough to quibble about an extra 7.5% DPS from the Plasma Cannon. Up to 1247 consistent DPS and 1761 when the squalls last.You should check your numbers before accusing me of 'not typing them out because I am wrong' (or look back at the number I typed out previously that you apparently didn't bother to read). 2x HAC + plasma is (214*2)*2 + 750*1.075 = 1662 DPS to shields, compared to 3x HAC +2x grav + 1x Ion: 3*(2*214) + 2*(2*100) + 50 = 1734 (only 70 more shield DPS with 450 of that being soft flux which is significant). Given the soft flux, I would call that about the same. With squalls, champion has 2174 shield DPS which is a lot more. Also, HEF is burst DPS, not a flat small bonus, which also does matter a lot for winning the flux battle.
Like. An AI Champion fit as you describe cannot kill an AI Eagle in the sim before it runs out of squalls when the AI eagle is fit with only Heavy Mortars in the front and gravitons in the back which is an absurdly bad fit and i think that the only reason it will kill it before time runs out is because the Eagle is likely to get wedged on the side.You can just say 'the eagle is fast enough to run away the whole time', which is what happens, and was already established by the 'eagle is faster' statement. Not sure what you are trying to say with this? Eagle is better at harassing/running away? Sure, but that's not what we were talking about.
Where the hell is Megas? I'm getting worried.Last post was only 4 days ago, he's probably okay. But yeah since you mentioned that, it does feel weird without seeing an opinion from the old man.
A 10 page balance thread and no Megas? I hope he is okay.
You are really fixated on those HAC's eh? I'm not exactly sure how to tell you this, but you haven't explained at all how your build deals with armour. Don't tell me you're relying on 2 small missiles on a cruiser.
I've pretty much said my piece by now, so I won't repeat myself here. If you want to compare the eagle to champion please give me a build that will compete with anything I showcased in the video. The eagle has its place but it's just outclassed by the champion in a head on confrontation.
2x HAC + plasma is (214*2)*2 + 750*1.075 = 1662 DPS to shields
You can just say 'the eagle is fast enough to run away the whole time', which is what happens, and was already established by the 'eagle is faster' statement. Not sure what you are trying to say with this? Eagle is better at harassing/running away? Sure, but that's not what we were talking about.
Not to mention that champion build is not specialized for shield DPS at all. If I wanted to hyper specialize into shield DPS like your build, I could run volatile particle driver
Or if I don't have one, I could run autopulse and 4x IR pulse lasers for 10 more OP
Only if your ship produces 1253 flux per second. Which the champion does not. If your ship does not produce 1253 flux per second then the DPS to shields is weighted by the average flux. I.E 1662 x 940/1253 = 1250 dps assuming the shields are turned off and 955 assuming the shields are turned on.
You can shoot higher than this and it may be wise to. But you cannot sustain higher than this. And the Eagle can.
...
So you have no forward facing PD and are attempting to run 500 range weapons In order to fill the gap? Like come on you would not seriously suggest filling your line with autopulse champions and expect them to perform well. They would splash their Autopulse all over the front of the enemies line missing half the shots and the IR pulse would never fire unless the ship was going to die because your pressure was collapsing and the enemy fleet was stronger than yours.
If the champion cannot prosecute the Eagle then it cannot push the line hard hard enough to win the fight. The Eagle is holding the line and if the Eagle is holding the line beyond the time your missiles run out then the Eagle is going to eventually grind you down. It may not deliver the final blow. But it’s purpose is not to do that it’s to make sure the line holds.If the eagle is max flux running away without even hitting the champions shields (that's what happened when I tested it), I don't think you can call that 'holding the line'... lmfao. That's more like retreating while your slower allies would be getting slaughtered.
I specifically said I am using skills/officers to get more dissipation. Flux regulation gives 10% more base dissipation which is 50 extra, (you strangely included the +5 vents but not the +10% base dissipation)
I also specifically mentioned IPDAI with elite PD for the IR pulse lasers to match range and give PD, but I guess reading is hard.
If the eagle is max flux running away without even hitting the champions shields (that's what happened when I tested it), I don't think you can call that 'holding the line'... lmfao. That's more like retreating while your slower allies would be getting slaughtered
But that doesnt mean it doesn’t have a use or that it doesn’t have value for others. And if you only think about what you want to fit you will miss the value you can bring.
The 3 HAC Eagle provides more shield pressure than the champion (due to accuracy) for longer and for less DP.
And yet you cannot kill it. If you were facing one with well set weapons that would not be the case. If you turned to “kill its allies” you would be surrounded and fluxxed out.
That's because the Eagle is backing up, i.e. kiting. It is literally not holding the line, which is your rationale for focusing on anti-shield DPS in the first place. If kiting is what you're going for then forget about Eagle vs Champion and just stick a frigate there. The point is that even with "well set weapons" the Eagle is being forced back, and failing to hold the line. It has already lost the comparison.
I'm confused. Why is Eagle vs Champion about which one can do more anti-shield DPS?
This has gone so far you start the question if people even play the game in their free time, or just have an Excel spreadsheet open.
I had an Eagle during almost the whole last playthrough and I can't wrap my head around how someone could say it "holds the line". Scared Eagle will back away with the Jets and leave the allies open, you don't have to do math for that.
The Eagle does indeed do a thing the champion cannot do. The champion simply cannot put as much consistent or safe shield pressure out.Sorry but I just can't take this discussion seriously anymore after this line.
Maybe your problem wasn’t that the Eagle gave a bit of ground maybe it was that your champion could not?Didn't use a single Champion that run because I wanted to use the ships I don't usually get (at least lately).
Sorry but do you care about the experience other players have with Eagle? Or are you just defending Eagle no matter what because you like it and managed to make it work?
Giving the Eagle better base speed and maneuverability and then an offensive ship system would go a long way to making it competitive. While new systems would be cool, what if there was one version that got AAF, and one version that got HEF? Say for a certain purple painted faction that has special energy weapons?Before the Eradicator, my go-to assault chaingun ship was always the Eagle. It was one of few that could comfortably seat 3, with SO, of course. Fast, brawling ship that can mount a lot of firepower that takes advantage of AAF is occupied by the Eradicator now, which does it so much better than the Eagle ever could.
So just for amusement value, I grabbed the latest AI battles mod (13.0), and setup a shield pressure Eagle against a Plasma/Squall Champion in a fleet situation with no officers or fleet skills.
I really really wouldn't want to see the Eagle get a fighter bay because that wouldn't synergize at all with the role the Eagle fills in a fleet.
Defining that role has been the exercise of this entire thread. What is the Eagle%u2019s role currently and what should it be? At present, it only seems suited for long-distance pressure, or at least that seems like the safest approach. Its slow speed inhibits an assault role and its weapon placement makes the Medium Energies tough to utilize.
Just my 2 cents, removing the energies means losing ion beams on the long range builds (xyphos don't have enough range to work in such cases). For punching down, phase beams are pretty good.QuoteDefining that role has been the exercise of this entire thread. What is the Eagle’s role currently and what should it be? At present, it only seems suited for long-distance pressure, or at least that seems like the safest approach. Its slow speed inhibits an assault role and its weapon placement makes the Medium Energies tough to utilize.
According to the lore text, the role is to be a core combat ship with a wide threat range, especially good at punching down at frigates. In my experience it does that poorly because its best weapons are on fixed mounts that are hard to aim at faster ships.
What it does do well however is fill the core role of line ship. It has excellent PD and excellent long range pressure that's easy for the AI to pilot and is easy to slot into almost any fleet. Having 2-4 kinetic/pd eagles/falcons in your fleet makes the rest of your fleet better.
The main issue as others in the thread have pointed out is medium energy as a mount. If you deleted the medium energy slots from both the Falcon and the Eagle entirely, the effectiveness of the long range fit wouldn't meaningfully change.
Why do people like Ion Beams so much? I just can't get my head around them, very expensive EMP weapons that deal very little damage.
I'd rather have a Graviton Beam over an Ion any day.
No forward PD? You put a flux distributor and stabilized shields on a ship that has 900 dissipation (660 post shield) and 838 weapon flux before those mods. You are actually dissipating more flux than you can possibly utilize and you’re paying how much in OP for it?
Edit: specifically I tend to like 2 heavy burst in the front and regular PD in the back with swarmers in the launchers but there may be fitting i implications for this without a mods. But I find that dealing with fighters and forward missiles is more important in the types of fights you tend to need to fight and you can generally rotate/prevent flankers with reapers in other ways.
Why do people like Ion Beams so much? I just can't get my head around them, very expensive EMP weapons that deal very little damage.
I'd rather have a Graviton Beam over an Ion any day.
Why do people like Ion Beams so much? I just can't get my head around them, very expensive EMP weapons that deal very little damage.
I'd rather have a Graviton Beam over an Ion any day.
I use 3x Hyper Velocity + 3x Graviton on my Eagles but I have not done much testing on the Ion beam.
I really really wouldn't want to see the Eagle get a fighter bay because that wouldn't synergize at all with the role the Eagle fills in a fleet.
Defining that role has been the exercise of this entire thread. What is the Eagle’s role currently and what should it be? At present, it only seems suited for long-distance pressure, or at least that seems like the safest approach. Its slow speed inhibits an assault role and its weapon placement makes the Medium Energies tough to utilize.
What should it be? If it is supposed to be a generalist, more speed allows for the Energies to diversify and do more of the heavy lifting. A flight deck increases the versatility/flexibility of the hull. I still lean toward more speed over a fighter bay but, on paper, I like the idea of Eagles contributing to fighter critical mass.
In Hiruma Kai’s fleet setting, 5 Eagles contributing 5 fighter squadrons would be a significant departure from the what the Champion brings to the table. At least I would imagine. Testing may prove otherwise. Likewise, Eagles screaming around at base 70-75 speed would likely change outcomes, even if loadouts didn’t budge. I’d prefer to see if assault variant Eagles, with higher speed, confer an advantage over current long-range support variants. My gut tells me that an Eagle with a Heavy Blaster or Phase Lances paired with efficient Kinetics would be superior, if it could engage/disengage better via speed.
Assuming people are finding these results interesting. To be honest, Goumindong's fit, at the 20 DP price point looked reasonably good. 2 wins/2 losses, 1 close fight is pretty darn good when trying to compare balance. I suppose I should figure out if 0.95.1a officer skills were fixed with the AI tournament mod - haven't been paying much attention to the tournament scene lately.
Well, I tend to rear PD simply because AI likes to use Salamanders and the Eagle has fixed forward shields, but yeah I could go heavier on PD it's quite true.
An Ion Beam is useful on long range pressure Eagles because otherwise the AI can tank the hits on the armor. Going 2x HVD + 1x Mauler also does the same, but that is cutting into the kinetic budget a lot. The Ion Beam doesn't help the Eagle all that much because this configuration of Eagles lacks the ability to capitalize, but in terms of helping other ships and being a pain for the enemy, the Ion Beam lets them shut down enemy offense, flame out enemies through their shields from the front, etc. (It certainly helps the Eagle to catch smaller ships when they have no engines.) For pure kiting (IE HVD) Eagles, the EMP from the HVD's stacks with the Ion Beam to be more reliable in terms of shutting things down. The flux cost is only 200/second, so they aren't expensive - for the pure kiting build the ship doesn't need any skills/flux distributor/stabilized shields to be neutral so I'd even argue that 1 ion beam means the ship is undergunned for any crowded fight in terms of flux expenditure.
Assuming people are finding these results interesting. To be honest, Goumindong's fit, at the 20 DP price point looked reasonably good. 2 wins/2 losses, 1 close fight is pretty darn good when trying to compare balance. I suppose I should figure out if 0.95.1a officer skills were fixed with the AI tournament mod - haven't been paying much attention to the tournament scene lately.
That is about what I expected. Which would suggest that, especially if squalls and hurricanes are getting reduced in power, that the eagle doesn't terribly need a 10 speed boost, let alone a hangar bay and 15 OP.
This has gone so far you start the question if people even play the game in their free time, or just have an Excel spreadsheet open.
(Been keeping up with this thread, lots of good stuff here!)
But also, right, with the Squall and the Hurricane getting a touch weaker, that might be sufficient if we're just comparing to the Champion.
Out of curiosity, any changes likely coming for high scatter amplifier or beams in general (other than the new fragmentation beam) as those play into a large portion of the Eagle's effectiveness, in the same way Squalls and Hurricanes play into Champion effectiveness.
So its role is...shield tanker? Not super exciting, I gotta admit.
Man, are we ever gonna get another ship with a unique built-in weapon?
It's not! But, gotta have some ships like that - "solid performer" rather than "superstar".
edit: 3x HVD 3xGraviton is very good 1v1 in the sim because the AI just doesn't want to approach that raw shield pressure. When the sim was full "*** eagle" it was very hard to build a ship that could beat it in the AI simply because the raw shield pressure was simply absurd and even like... SO Heavy Armor Aurora would not be willing to just like... go and kill the damned thing.
I am not sure its going to be bad I just like... Don't want to run it. Also since i am running officers the range band of the ion beam and the HAC line up pretty well. 800 x 1.65 = 1320. And 1000 x 1.55 = 1550. But the Ion Beams are set like 100 range back so its only a 130 range difference and the HAC projectiles still have a bit of range falloff whereas the beams do not. Whereas the HVD would be hitting to 1650, outranging the ion/graviton by almost 200 due to the mounting differences not including falloff potential. Which just means the Ions/Gravitons may just end up not getting used.
I am willing to entertain it but the extra lead is just quite good.
Worth noting that 3x HVD provide 600 ion DPS too and better armor hit strength (138 vs 50) so its not like you want to armor tank against that setup. But its just also just 456 less hard kinetic pressure per second (actual because the Eagle will be significantly underfluxxed with three HVD)
Imo, Eagle's main issue is AI. If Eagle is to win against Champion or Eradictor, it usually happens at near max range of Eagle's weapons (ignoring SO builds).I have not paid super close attention to what all the different personalities do. But as described isnt Aggressive supposed to maintain #2 range? If not it's what it should do, maintain range of all non-PD weapons - 100 or something is ideal generic range.
Cautious is just not an option - it doesn't maintain engagement, letting enemy retreat and vent easily.
Steady AI is incredibly flawed with long range combat, because it always starts to close range as it wins flux war. Which is completely unnecessary when you have at least equal range + speed advantage over the target. Eagle just needs to maintain range buffer (max range - 100 or so against Eradicator, even less against Champion, exact value depends on speed difference and target's mobility system, if any) so that enemies can't escape during Eagle's system cooldown. Getting any closer risks target flipping situation with weapon setup more efficient at closer range for no gain.
Aggressive+ is incapable of long range combat by definition.
In more general terms, I think ships need to be aware of their own and target's range bands so to say. Like 3 Grav + 2HNeedler+1HMauler + 3PD Lasers Eagle has 3: 1) Grav only 2) +Ballistics 3) +PD. 1st is really not a proper engagement, and it often should consider holding fire (for zero flux boost) in this range band when trying to catch up to a fleeing target. 2nd is it's bread and butter. 3rd exists mostly to bully slow frigates or non-combat ships, the only reason to go that close against a ship that can fight back is if target is faster than Eagle and would disengage quickly otherwise.
It's not! But, gotta have some ships like that - "solid performer" rather than "superstar".With that in mind, are you considering the XIV variant a candidate for potential stardom?
I thought PL stopped using Eagles, after it got the Champion instead.Lol I somehow managed to forget that, even though I got it right in this very thread before xD What the hell, me?
I feel like it's actually in a pretty good place otherwise - I don't want to *change* it very much. FWIW, the way I see its role as ... "fluidly holding an area" might be the best way to put it.
I'm a newer player, so take this with a grain of sand, but I the main thing I found insufficient about the eagle is its comically low speed. The manoeuvre is okay, but the in game description bills it as a the bigger brother to the falcon.
What I find in most of my battles AI vs AI is that while HVD is less dps then HAC, it's much better at what you actually want to do which is cause enemy AI ships to overload. There's two reasons for this. 1) HVD does more damage per volley then HAC so its more likely to push a ship above max and 2) The AI really really doesn't want to take HVD shots on armor, leading it to shield HVD when it would drop shield against HAC. Also combos super well with HE missiles.
This is why God invented the Ion Beam. It's the EMP component that makes the NPCs keep up their shields against HVDs.
This is why God invented the Ion Beam. It's the EMP component that makes the NPCs keep up their shields against HVDs.
HVDs are EMP weapons themselves.
(Maybe? But as much fun as those are, they can also make for a ship with fewer loadout options, so that's something I want to be sparing with.)
SpoilerSo, apparently speed 30 Dominators don't mix with speed 45 Conquests and speed 60 Gryphons, because the glass cannon missile launchers get in front of the Dominators in the mad dash for the central objectives, and then can't back up because the Dominators are right behind them, despite the Dominators starting out in front at spawn. They'd probably be fine with some human intervention setting up a line initially. Typically means a Grypon dies on the Dominator side in the first exchange. On the other hand, the range advantage plus 36 Harpoons each is telling as the fight goes on.
So using 4 shield pressure + Ion Dominators with: 2 Mark IX, 2 Hypervelocity driver, 3 Harpoon Pods, 5 Vulcans, Xyphos, Converted Hangar, Integrated Targeting Unit, 30 Vents, 1 Cap
Dominators win (Conquest, Gryphon, 2 Centurions lost)
Dominators win (Gryphon, Centurion lost)
Dominators win(Dominator, Gryphon, 2 Centurions lost)
So, to try to make it fairer, I switched over to a Hypervelocity Driver Eagle:
3x Hypervelocity Driver (provides ion already), 3x Graviton Beams, 2x Harpoons, 2x PD, ITU, Stabilized Shields, 25 Vents, 24 Capacitors
Eagles win (2 Eagles, 1 Gryphon, 5 Centurions lost)
Dominator pyrrhic victory (4 Dominators, 2 Gryphons, 5 Centurions lost)
Eagles win (3 Centurions lost)
Again, the core fleet and the Dominators really don't mix, but this time the Dominators didn't have a range advantage, so the speed of the Eagles was much more telling. Essentially, Dominators and Eagles can't quite fill the same role I think, and here the backing fleet is favoring a more mobile front line, since it is so mobile itself. Probably backing with 2 Astrals or Paragons would provide a different outcome.
So seeing the impact maneuverability had on the AI, I decided to try the obvious substitution, Falcons. So going back to the original HACs, Ion, Heavy burst, swarmer Eagles, I then setup Falcons similarly:
2 HACs, 1 Ion Beam, 1 Heavy Burst PD, 2 PD lasers, 2 Swarmers, ITU, 30 Vents, 23 Caps
Also, 1 kite_Starting, to make 7 Falcons + 1 kite = 100 DP.
Falcons win (2 Falcons, 1 Centurion lost)
Falcons win (1 Falcon, 3 Centurions lost)
Falcons win (1 Falcon, 3 Centurions lost)
Pretty consistent encounters. 1 on 1, Falcon will typically lose if the Eagle's Ion beam disables the Falcons engine, but the sheer number of ships is eventually telling, not to mention a very consistent encircling pattern by the AI eventually means you've got a big ball of Eagles/Conquest in the middle without any where to back up to and vent. At least in this configuration, with a relatively speedy core fleet, the Falcons seem to "hold" better than the Eagles. Again, this is just a 20 DP Eagle change.
So trying the 0.75 shield tweak for Eagles, and doing the rematch with Falcons:
Falcons win (3 Falcons lost)
Falcons win (1 Falcon, 1 kite - kite was friendly fire when overloaded and got run over by a Falcon's shields when the Falcon was trying to get to the enemy)
Falcons win (1 kite lost)
Doesn't look too good for the Eagles, even considering the vagaries of the AI. If you want a shield tanked line that fluidly holds, you're probably better off with the Falcons, as they give you more options for ships to cycle in and out to vent, and are much faster at doing it, despite having about 2/3 the shield tank individually. In this case the Eagles are giving ground and getting surrounded by the superior numbers of ships, with roughly the same weapons loadouts. Now in theory, the Eagles are better concentrated for officers, so that might matter in a full 240 DP fleet. Assuming a 100 DP cruiser core, you need 2 more officers for the Falcons than the Eagles, for example. 7 officers in Falcons is a pretty hefty investment, although it does mean if you're willing to burn story points on mercenary officers, the Falcon fleet likely has a higher power ceiling. It's also not too bad if you're running 3-4 Capitals plus the +2 officer skill, so 10 officers plus player spread amongst 3 Capitals, 7 Falcons, and a some frigates, for example.[close]
Eagle's average speed is slightly below 75 (you won't trigger the system with perfect timing), higher than 60 of Champion or 70 of Eradicator.
If you're including the jets of the eagle then the speed of the eradicator is like, 135, not 70...
Eagle's average speed is slightly below 75 (you won't trigger the system with perfect timing), higher than 60 of Champion or 70 of Eradicator.
If you're including the jets of the eagle then the speed of the eradicator is like, 135, not 70... and the champion is a heavy cruiser, the eagle should be much faster, not slightly faster. By comparison that's the difference I think it ought to have to the falcon... and comparing it to the falcons characteristics gets even worse if you include manoeuvring jets.
Base Eradicator has AAF. Pirate Eradicator is the one that has Burn Drive.
Sure, but its 135 forward and only forward. And that is a significant issue.
Maneuvering jets also set your maximum acceleration to be the same in all directions iirc. Or gives a boost enough such that that is functionally the case that your rear acceleration is similar to forward. This is a significant effect in the ability to avoid fire and back away even if its probabilistic with regards to it going off when necessary for the AI.
So its entirely incorrect to say that the pirate eradicator has a speed of 135. Its not equivalent to the Eagles speed of ~75 in this manner.
Pirate Eradicator can catch up to Eagle, BUT since it traded AAF for Burn Drive, it lacks firepower to threaten an Eagle (unless it has massive character skills advantage). So Eagle still wins easily against it.Unskilled Pirate Eradicator with a good loadout vs. SIM Eagle is usually a win for the Pirate Eradicator.
...So its entirely incorrect to say that the pirate eradicator has a speed of 135. Its not equivalent to the Eagles speed of ~75 in this manner.
Its entirely correct. Manoeuvring jets are less about speed than manoeuvre, and burn drive is about speed, at the cost of manouvre . If you accept MJ as a speed increase then you may not dismiss BD, because it's doubly as valid.
Yeah, those are all true, but they're not speed. I'm not saying maneuvering jets are bad because they're great, but they aren't speed, flux dissipation, post modern architecture, or 1420 AD London poetry
HBL on Eagle actually runs into the opposite problem it encounters 90% of the time. And that is not enough mounts to do actual damage so your small mounts will most likely do the PD duty. Eagle on the other hand has already enough mounts for PD, and getting an OP expensive inefficient PD laser, that's not even that much better than the small mounts, a bit of a waste. It's not a bad choice or a trap, but I still feel HBL is a bit cursed in its role and slot.Can someone remind me why it costs 11 op instead of like... 9? It seems comparable to a regular Flak in terms of performance, so unless energy pd is supposed to be less efficient I don't see why not.
Yeah it's extremely meh, and I suppose the high cost comes from its smaller version which costs 7 OP on a small mount. Perhaps it would look weird that an "upgrade" is only slightly cheaper but at this point I doubt even that would help it much. It really needs better performance so you can justify sacrificing damage on high tech ships and range on midline ships.The way I see it let's not limit the weapon changes by what looks weird. On the other hand, yeah, I have only ever considered HBL once, on an Astral. Doesn't help that IPDAI exists. I'm wondering what new weapons and changes are coming besides those teased in the blog posts. I wouldn't be surprised if HBL turned out to be an entirely different weapon next patch.
Yeah it's extremely meh, and I suppose the high cost comes from its smaller version which costs 7 OP on a small mount. Perhaps it would look weird that an "upgrade" is only slightly cheaper but at this point I doubt even that would help it much. It really needs better performance so you can justify sacrificing damage on high tech ships and range on midline ships.It costs 4 more than the basic version, just like how a dualflak costs 4 more than a regular flak, but the problem with that comparison is both flak guns are competing for the same medium slot while a heavy bust is the only one that asks you to make that sacrifice.
You can do most of the content in the game with Eagles but there's just straight up better options for everything the Eagle can do.What's better than the Eagle at being a wet blanket?
So anyone got anything? Or is this bird still worthless?
Somehow people think you can only build ships like duelers
Bruh if your Eagle is on the other part of the map soloing something
CapnHector gave you another solid example of such strategy and you completely ignored it.
Alright, I wanted to know if the Eagle (LG) ultra long range build might actually be good or not. So I took a break from the holy war, cheated myself the blueprint (I won't continue from this save don't worry) and built a fleet of these. This is the build. Now note I played without officers because my officers are not suitable for this ship and with Reckless AI because apparently I forget that the doctrine can be changed these days. No player input, no playership and no orders given to the fleet. I brought 17 Eagles and they destroyed an Ordo with 9 losses, which, despite not being what most players want, I think is actually pretty good considering the circumstances of no orders etc. I didn't actually count but I think almost all of the losses were to the Radiant.How about ion beams instead of autolances?
The summary of the combat test is that it can pop other Remnant ships very fast, but can't fight a Radiant. It can't deliver the flux to force the Radiant to back off and Radiants can catch this ship, so they will die to it in droves. This is an example of a support ship, if you try it in the sim it can't duel anything but if several of these focus one ship - which they will, due to their long range and mobility - that ship will die very fast. As for why Graviton over HVD, the idea is just +200 range, but also happens to be easy on the flux so you can install a lot of other stuff. The Breaches lasted all through the combat like a mini-Gryphon.
(https://i.ibb.co/pvWydCY/image.png) (https://ibb.co/XZy8tmc)
(https://i.ibb.co/59xmnw4/image.png) (https://ibb.co/cvX0CV3)
Some screenshots like I like to post these days, I think it makes for more fun reading and memories.
(https://i.ibb.co/DRvYDCm/image.png) (https://ibb.co/2kCS7tR)
(https://i.ibb.co/cTfXcW8/image.png) (https://ibb.co/tCjPM02)
(https://i.ibb.co/44N3s8z/image.png) (https://ibb.co/YfjwDcm)
DCR output with damage output from best ship
(https://i.ibb.co/k6xvJQQ/image.png) (https://ibb.co/FqKCXgg)
(https://i.ibb.co/Jy2btbZ/image.png) (https://ibb.co/VQDh9h6)
Now I think if you were to eliminate the Radiant problem - say, by piloting a ship yourself and taking out the Radiant, and additionally gave it an officer with Gunnery Implants and Target Analysis, then this would actually probably be quite a good ship.
Why, to EMP the enemy rather than kill? The IR Autolance did 2/3 of the hull damage, would not swap, it is actually a good weapon and the ships stacking them when the enemy drops shields is the point of the build. However Ion Beam is actually a decent idea, in the form of adding a Converted Hangar + Xyphos. Also if tinkering with the build, the Breach did very little, would probably swap for Hammer or even Atropos. Reaper if making the ship go closer.I will try out the Autolance + converted xyphos onto the the LG eagle i got. On the missile slots i personally placed gazer DEMs but honestly i just did it because beam saturation is nice to look at. That aside i doubt that reapers will go well on that build considering it is all about long range beams...
Why, to EMP the enemy rather than kill? The IR Autolance did 2/3 of the hull damage, would not swap, it is actually a good weapon and the ships stacking them when the enemy drops shields is the point of the build. However Ion Beam is actually a decent idea, in the form of adding a Converted Hangar + Xyphos. Also if tinkering with the build, the Breach did very little, would probably swap for Hammer or even Atropos. Reaper if making the ship go closer.I will try out the Autolance + converted xyphos onto the the LG eagle i got. On the missile slots i personally placed gazer DEMs but honestly i just did it because beam saturation is nice to look at. That aside i doubt that reapers will go well on that build considering it is all about long range beams...
CapnHector gave you another solid example of such strategy and you completely ignored it.
The solid example of losing half your fleet every time you fight? I guess you could call it a "playstyle". The question remains how many players share that playstyle, how practical it is and if it's reasonable to judge ships by it.
The LG Eagle has two of the three front ballistic mounts converted to hybrid.
It's probably meant to be just bad, they couldn't even be competent and convert the third,
The LG Eagle has two of the three front ballistic mounts converted to hybrid.
It's probably meant to be just bad, they couldn't even be competent and convert the third,
The middle ballistic is so you can still use rangefinder for hybrid weapons.
It's probably meant to be just bad ...
Poked around with the converted hangar xiphos to add those ion beams to the mix. It however comes up into the issue that well if you go advanced optics + ITU the range of your beams is 1680 and the xiphos beam has a range of 1000 + 100 if you S-Mod Targeting defensive Array
Xyphos have advanced optics so their range is 1,200 normally and 1,300 with smod targeting array.
Poked around with the converted hangar xiphos to add those ion beams to the mix. It however comes up into the issue that well if you go advanced optics + ITU the range of your beams is 1680 and the xiphos beam has a range of 1000 + 100 if you S-Mod Targeting defensive Array so yeah there is a big range mismatch here therefore it won't help if the eagle is trying to stay at range but the xiphos will give nice PD support (Specially if you S-Modded defensive targeting array) and the ion beams are still there if the gap is closed so i guess it will help in survivability in general? I also replaced the heavy mauler with a HVD because the mauler felt redundant with autoloader breaches and it has also EMP so it helps on bullying ships.
Honestly i am just poking around with stuff and i will probably load back my save and think this over a bit later but this thing can bully a sim dominator until it blows up so that was funny to watch.
DTA may be a bit short range though. In havent had a chance to test it but don’t non-PD usually stay behind the primary ship? So the range of the daggers at 1200 from the back may be kinda low if you’re pushing 1600 range for your beams/ballistics.
I can get to the final Radiant and Apexes destroying all the rest. Unfortunately I can't win the fight despite repeated attempts and due to overconfidence I've locked myself into it, saving 1 second before the fight.
Also the gameplay is totally unenjoyable, it takes the normal herding cats experience of high level Starsector and turns it up to 11. I run out of CP trying to make them not chase frigates. I think the fleet would win if I could set the ship to not do so.