Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

1

General Discussion / Re: Expectations for 1.0

« on: June 08, 2023, 04:57:32 AM »

More simulator options. There's absolutely no reason why we can't pick any ship we want, clutter is a weak excuse when there's a bunch of d-modded ships and 3 Dominator variants. Adding ships manually is tedious. And since the game shifted so much in gameplay, we should be able to put officers in opponents. You will never fight a capital that has zero combat skills. So let me try fighting a realistic opponent. I know the average player is not crazy about this but for us test junkies this would be really cool to have.

And yeah the Codex revamp has been mentioned many many moons ago but I suspect it's being witheld since it's not a very exciting update.

EDIT: Funny thing, ever since campaign started being developed and we slowly got new stuff, my number one thing was faction diversity, so that fighting each of them has a unique feel. And this patch brought us exactly that so I can't say it anymore 

Ideally, it would be possible to choose the ships and refit them including giving them officers. Could allow all the baseline ships including variants of those and also allow all the hidden content that you've seen in the battle with an easy way to unlock it from the beginning via the configuration file.

I usually enable the developer simulator variants but that's really not good enough. Easily beating a Radiant with Paladins and no officer doesn't mean much.

2

General Discussion / Re: Safety Overrides Rework

« on: June 03, 2023, 02:58:35 PM »

>Aggressive AI goes all the way to the lowest PD range even when there's only rear PD so my attempt at using Aggressive with an LR PD Laser on the front didn't work as well as expected since they approach to Burst PD range.
>even when there's only rear PD
Sounds to me like the (specific ship) AI is in need of a tweak... :/

It's easy to see by testing an Eagle against a Venture in the simulator for a slow target where it decides the range of engagement.

Aggressive AI works fine for SO builds. It doesn't fly nearly aggressively enough in fleet battles for the builds I posted above, but it's not really noticeable in 1v1 since it doesn't need to approach multiple ships (they're comfortable near allies, but they won't rush forward as a group without orders). Aggressive AI in a long range Eagle with even only 2x rear Burst PD will essentially fly the same way, which both demonstrates why it's not aggressive enough for SO and also why it's no good for regular non-SO ships. It doesn't treat the close range SO build as not needing as much caution.

2x HVD, 1x Heavy Mauler, 3x Graviton, 3x Tactical Laser and rear slots empty with Aggressive AI flies as you would expect. It goes closer than 1000 to keep the weapons on target and to be able to pursue them properly. Add 2x rear Burst PD Laser and it will fly in to less than 500 range as if it's an SO build with HMG / Assault Chainguns / Heavy Blasters. This means even adding 2x LR PD Laser will make it fly significantly closer to the enemy.

Now, try Steady AI. 2x HVD, 1x Heavy Mauler, 3x Graviton, 3x Tactical Laser and 2x rear Burst PD will try to stay at maximum weapon range. It isn't great at keeping 100% Graviton Beam uptime against the target. It stays right at the boundary and keeps having the beams out of range. It's also incredibly bad at killing anything that's faster than the base speed since it's happy to simply stay near maximum range and barely uses the movement system. Replace an HVD with HAC and it will keep 100% Graviton Beam uptime along with giving the Heavy Mauler and HVD more leeway to stay active when ships back off. It's not really a solution. If there was a non-PD beam with 800 range to put in a small energy slot, that would help. It would help if there were variants of the Tactical Laser with lower range to set the engagement distance.

What I actually want for non-SO Eagles is to be able to use 2x HVD, 1x Heavy Mauler, 3x Graviton Beam and 5x Burst PD with Aggressive AI but with it ignoring PD for engagement range. Not even being able to have rear Burst PD without it getting really close makes it unusable though. Instead, I have to use Steady AI and consider using HAC instead of HVD for at least one of the 2 slightly further ahead kinetic slots so they use a proper engagement range for the other weapons.

For the SO fleet I described, you work around the overly cautious AI with tons of eliminate orders and then Full Assault. In a long range fleet, you work around the overly cautious Steady AI by making the difference with your flagship. Remnants are the hardest repeatable enemies and they're extremely aggressive, so having powerful slow ships will make them come to you. Eagles are fast enough (60 + 50 with up to 50% uptime) to still kite at max range, so really the AI is choosing not to get kills. 0.96 Eagles are very powerful, Steady AI is just bad at getting kills with a typical long range build except when forced into it by the enemy.

3

General Discussion / Re: Safety Overrides Rework

« on: June 02, 2023, 05:25:07 PM »

Cool! If you have an Aurora Eagle fleet that is suitable for double Ordo farming I definitely want to see that. Any chance of more details or a battle report?

The fleet described above (4 Aurora, 6 Eagle) can reliably kill them. I wasn't trying to farm them but rather testing it against them. Not really an effective way to farm due to burning through CR unless there was a colony in the system to repair. I didn't try using it against the Omega fights where it might be a good idea to have Dual Flak or other changes for the fighter spam.

I switched to an Odyssey which required downgrading 2 of the other Auroras to Brawler (LP) in an attempt to have more fun but it didn't work as well. Flagship Aurora still quite useful for helping to approach Radiants by letting the AI take fire and then putting yourself between them, particularly because the AI isn't smart enough to take full advantage of the speed to avoid always being directly in front. Everything other than Radiants is a complete joke to them and Radiants die easily once the rest of their fleet is largely gone. Without having a flagship, it might be hard to avoid losses against Radiants since the AI isn't great at leaving in time or taking cover behind other ships. They can get in a bit of a traffic jam and it's nice to be able to literally push them away.

I'm finding Eagles extremely effective in general, particularly long range ones with 3x Graviton, 2x HVD, 1x Heavy Mauler and Burst PD. Steady AI stays at max range so it's no good at killing things. Putting a single IR Pulse Laser makes them go to close range with Steady AI and get kills, while being a bit more cautious than Aggressive AI, but it goes way too close and it's more 700-800 range that's desired, not 500. Aggressive AI goes all the way to the lowest PD range even when there's only rear PD so my attempt at using Aggressive with an LR PD Laser on the front didn't work as well as expected since they approach to Burst PD range. Currently finding it hard to justify using other cruisers and it's a pain that Champions and Eradicators will get themselves killed. Eagles go really well alongside Onslaughts or Conquests for actually killing stuff. I end up optimizing for avoiding losses and the Eagle is pretty much the perfect ship for it now. I think I underappreciated them before 0.96, particularly the fact that they were already faster on average than Eradicators and now they got a 10 speed boost.

4

General Discussion / Re: Safety Overrides Rework

« on: May 31, 2023, 11:00:14 PM »

Late game,..

How does it do vs 2 Ordos?

It works quite well. There's time pressure and you need to use command points well for batches of Eliminate orders. Fighters like Broadswords are a problem without any tweaks, but Remnant fighters aren't an issue.

5

General Discussion / Re: Safety Overrides Rework

« on: May 31, 2023, 01:11:52 PM »

Late game, I normally only use SO via Brawler (LP) since they're incredible for capturing / competing for points early on to get your whole fleet deployed. They can then hunt down frigates and fast destroyers on the flanks or in places they got separated from the main enemy fleet. They're an annoyance on the battle line for a non-SO fleet which is fine since Hardened Subsystems + Combat Endurance PPT doesn't last through a long fight anyway. They're ridiculously strong early game. I don't think Brawler (LP) being raised from 5 to 6 DP really changed much. In practice, it means I can't include Converted Hangar Sparks in a 2nd Onslaught. I don't really understand why the player is allowed to restore the Luddic Path d-mod.

I strongly disagree about SO not being strong late game, other than SO flagships in a non-SO fleet losing most of their power. It's certainly one dimensional and gets boring. It eliminates zero flux boost (including holding fire / dropping shields for it), active venting and anything other than rushing in and in some cases escaping before you run out of flux capacity. Since it takes so much of your OP and you need powerful weapons taking full advantage of all the dissipation, that gets rid of a huge part of what's involved in designing ships. Your ships get a lot of safety from powerful shields and speed despite the need for aggressive tactics. All your ships can escape from anything unless they do something remarkably stupid which you can largely prevent. Orders work better when the ships are so fast.

SO cruiser fleets are extremely good and work fine against late game content. It's a lot simpler to build these than other ships. Assault Chaingun is no good against high armor enemies and you need ships able to mount Heavy Blasters. Both Eagles and Auroras got massively buffed in 0.96, and they worked well before 0.96. Hardened Shields got a buff. Eagles were already faster on average than Eradicators and now gained 10 speed, which is a bit higher when combined with 100% combat readiness and Helmsmanship. Extended Shields gives full 360 shields when built-in, and you can't afford several non-built-in mods anyway. Auroras have base 0.6 efficiency and a hull mod they already needed (built-in front shields) now gives a tiny bit more. The ships need to be strong enough to approach late game enemies and take lots of fire with their shield holding up. Eagle's movement system is perfect for the AI. Aurora is perfect for quickly hunting down fast ships and take more punishment when wrapping things up with Full Assault via shield efficiency.

As a simple example: 4x Aurora, 6x Eagle for 240 DP. Officers in every cruiser (player + 10). 360 shields on all of them due to built-in Extended Shields for the Eagles and Brawlers. You really don't need Systems Expertise and it's best for ship systems with charges like the Odyssey anyway. There aren't really a lot of choices with how to build the ships. 2x Heavy Blaster for both Auroras and Eagles, 3x HMG for Eagles and 1x Pulse Laser + IR Pulse Lasers in the other slots is perfect against Ordos. Optionally a single front PD Laser for Auroras if you feel it's needed to make them act more reasonably against missiles. If there were high armor late game enemies, you could use 3x Heavy Blaster with some IR Pulse Lasers omitted.

For both Eagles and Auroras:

Aggressive Officer
Combat Endurance
Energy Weapon Mastery - Elite
Field Modulation - Elite
Helmsmanship
Ordnance Expertise
Target Analysis

Aurora:

2x Heavy Blaster
1x Pulse Laser
7x IR Pulse Laser

1x Capacitors
35x Vents

Built-in Hardened Shields
Built-in Shield Conversion - Front
Built-in Stabilized Shields
Hardened Subsystems
Safety Overrides

Eagle:

2x Heavy Blaster
1x Pulse Laser
3x Heavy Machine Gun
3x IR Pulse Laser

0x Capacitors
31x Vents

Built-in Extended Shields
Built-in Hardened Shields
Built-in Hardened Subsystems
Safety Overrides

This is ridiculously strong. There's not very much to figure out for the ship design. There's not nearly as much for the player to do with their flagship because the overall fleet is too strong and instead your main role is getting the AI ships to be aggressive enough. I get quickly bored with it because you're so extremely powerful through the entire game. You don't even need the Auroras, just the Eagles and Brawler (LP). Late game, I have so much more fun flying an Odyssey or Onslaught alongside long ranged ships focused on forming and holding a battle line (Eagles, Eradicators, Champions). Long range fleets don't need as much use of orders and there's no rush, so in that sense it's better, but the power of SO Aurora and SO Eagle is extreme. It is true that if you don't use orders, your fleet will struggle to do more than kiting and picking off enemies that are out of formation until PPT runs out. It's not a fleet that plays itself, at least without Reckless officers which is a lot less safe than orders.

It worked before, and it works significantly better in 0.96. I don't have an issue with it being strong. I have an issue with something strong being so boring to play. That's why I think it needs changes. I don't know exactly what, but there are good ideas people have presented such replacing always-on zero flux boost with more bonus speed and reducing the flux dissipation but allowing active venting. That would add back missing core game mechanics and the balance could be kept relatively similar, while giving the player more of an advantage over the AI flying the ships (helping to reduce power of an entirely SO fleet). I think it needs more change that that, but it would be a good start.

6

General Discussion / Re: Arbalest Autocannon too weak?

« on: May 29, 2023, 12:16:30 AM »

Onslaught is flux starved and benefits a lot from saving OP for hull mods so it might seem like a good platform for the Arbalest Autocannon. However, you can use Railguns in medium slots instead for 200 extra range (Ballistic Rangefinder) to match large ballistics, perfect accuracy, faster turn rate and 1 less OP. Railgun is much better at tracking small targets and consistently hitting them. Missing small targets isn't very flux efficient. Spreading 2x damage per hit shots across more armor also isn't necessarily better. 7x front-facing Railgun, Hellbore Cannon and 4x Jackhammer with built-in Expanded Missile Racks for killing large targets works well and despite the goal really being flux efficient damage saves a lot of OP. 2x HVD for the slots that are further back makes sense, but isn't a clear cut win. Even for the rear side slots, Railguns work better than Arbalests for shooing away frigates/destroyers. I do love HVD/Mauler for ships with more flux dissipation per weapon slot. I don't currently use HAC or Arbalest, but I used to use HAC sometimes in earlier versions.

7

General Discussion / Re: Current notes on 0.96a

« on: May 20, 2023, 11:23:43 AM »

We've gone so hard that now some are starting to call Eagle too strong. I've seen everything. On a serious note, it's honestly fine now, SO really isn't a balancing factor, I ignore it for discussion sake.

I'm not describing it as too strong. It's a more than adequate ship to mount 3x Graviton Beam for the anti-shield modifier but not a particularly great ship beyond support. I don't think nerfing the Aurora and Eagle is the solution for balancing SO and didn't suggest nerfing them. I was just pointing out that while it's still not a particularly great ship without SO, it's now one of the best SO ships. In terms of value for DP, it's perhaps the 2nd best one behind the Brawler (LP). It can deal with most enemies and just needs either an Aurora or Brawler (LP) to help it deal with faster ones.

SO itself is what should be changed, and I think it can be balanced and made into something more interesting without removing it. As an example, SO could make the shield unreliable by having some percentage of kinetic projectiles pass through it while also reducing armor by a percentage. This would provide a way to counter SO ships by wearing them down with kinetic weapons. It could also be adjusted to give less speed and dissipation so that it wouldn't need to disable active venting and zero flux boost, which currently takes away a lot of the mechanics making it interesting to fly ships.

8

General Discussion / Re: Current notes on 0.96a

« on: May 20, 2023, 10:35:25 AM »

Eagle is overtuned enough, thank you. Fighting a heg bountry with a bunch of endlessly kiting 1650 range Eagles is the least fun this game has to offer by a long shot. CR waiting room all over again, except these aren't phase ships and last forever.

I think it'd still be fine with the speed buff reverted. Speed was already comparable to an Eradicator via the ship system. It has a role as a utility ship in a fleet without many medium energy slots due to the Graviton Beam modifier. I've been using a couple alongside long range Eradicators. I started with Champions but I got tired of them running out of Squall ammo even with Missile Specialization. They also can't bring the full Graviton Beam modifier on their own. ECCM Squalls were extremely deadly before, especially massed, with no way for the enemy to really deal with it. It's still nearly as good when the enemy is within regular weapons range alongside HIL but the AI doesn't know how to use it conservatively. I would probably not be using any Eagles if Squalls hadn't been nerfed, since I'd just be using Champions alone instead of Eradicators + Eagles.

Non-XIV Eagle has become an extremely strong SO ship with 3x HMG, 3x Heavy Blaster and 360 shields. It used to be a bit too slow even with both Helmsmanship and Systems Expertise. Improved flux stats also help quite a lot. In my opinion at least, the XIV variant is significantly worse for this build because the 8% speed and maneuverability has a lot more of an impact than armor you rarely use and slightly better flux stats which it doesn't really need. Combined with Aurora's significant shield efficiency buff, SO fleets are even more ridiculously strong than they were before. Brawler (LP) also gets free 360 shields since Extended Shields was already an essential built-in mod, although I only use them in regular non-SO fleets since they're unnecessary if you have a couple SO Auroras.

9

General Discussion / Re: Logistics is 90% of Combat

« on: May 15, 2023, 09:49:55 PM »

RE: the SO Aurora, do you put Reckless officers on it?

I use Aggressive officers with heavy use of eliminate orders and then Full Assault once we have a strong advantage. Can always cancel eliminate orders or force them to pull back if needed. They need to be coerced into being as aggressive as needed. Having a single mostly useless front turret PD weapon also helps them fly more aggressively. It could literally be a mining laser, but it might as well be a PD laser.

Always nice to find another Aurora user. I'm currently working on an SO build that makes use of two Ion pulsers, a heavy blaster, two antimatter blasters, with built in expanded mags for the dps increase.
For your build, dropping solar shielding and replacing it with one of built ins, and replacing one of the built ins with stabilized shields may be worth it. 10% of all incoming hard flux being turned into soft flux across the board may be more useful than a 10% decrease in energy weapon damage.

I think you're right about that. It ends up with a significant amount of extra flux dissipation that way: 2268 weapons flux (2520 reduced by Elite EWM) + 200 shield flux = 2468 and it has 2736 dissipation. The surplus also goes nicely with Elite Field Modulation. Need to drop capacitors down to 1x with the filled out front weapon slots if it's Hardened Shields or Hardened Subsystems being dropped since they cost 15 instead of 9. For AI ships, in addition to a single front PD weapon making them more aggressive, I think dropping at least a couple IR Pulse Lasers likely makes sense for higher capacitors.

I find that a long range fleet of Eradicators tends to lose ships more often than an SO fleet even without frigates on the field. Remnants can suddenly apply a lot of pressure and catch an overextended AI ship in a bad situation. Avoiding ship losses is why I mostly avoid frigates and destroyers especially due to story points invested into ships. Auroras are great at getting out of trouble unless a Tachyon Beam or Ion Beam takes out their engine which rarely ever happens. In a long range fleet, I need to be watching over the AI ships ready to save them. Conquest for long range and Odyssey for close range are both good at that.

Losing ships is terrible for logistics and even worse if you lose story points. I try to avoid reloading saves which means I tend to use almost entirely strong cruisers for the AI to avoid this. SO ships and then later an Odyssey can also do a lot on their own, saving a lot of supplies, but it stops mattering much late game. You can also start solo and then bring in the rest of the fleet if needed if you're using fast ships.

Champions being able to shoot squalls over each other helps a lot with avoiding being overwhelmed. Similarly, Vulcan Cannon is better solo PD than LR PD Laser but there's something to be said for them providing cover for each other. Groups of Eradicators are a lot more likely to get caught in a bad position where they can't support each other properly. In the 0.95.1a patch, I was quite convinced Eradicators were by far the strongest cruiser but ended up preferring Champions. Despite the Squall nerf, Champions benefit from more efficient HIL, Tactical Laser and the buff to Graviton Beam. I also don't think the Squall nerf really matters much in high pressure situations when it's paired with HIL. It only matters much at longer range in terms of it not working well as a finisher anymore, which doesn't impact their survivability much unless it ends up causing them to run out of missiles.

10

General Discussion / Re: Logistics is 90% of Combat

« on: May 15, 2023, 02:01:13 PM »

An easy example of this is Safety Overrides. The early- to mid-game is filled with relatively docile and forgiving enemies, so it's easy to just put SO on everything and steamroll through pirate fleets. Thus testing against early- to mid-game fleets will likely result in "use SO". But that is pretty bad advice when it comes to the endgame, when the enemies are much more vicious and when diving headfirst into a fleet means almost certain death. So the player who looks at testing based on the early- to mid-game -- where the results will most likely say "use SO" -- will be in for a rude awakening when he gets to the endgame. Then all the effort put into developing their fleet around SO basically goes to waste.

As an aside, that's why I don't feel like SO needs much of a change -- its power naturally fades as the player encounters harder content. I've noticed that most of the discussion claiming SO is too strong basically centers around a few specific ships -- Hyperion, Monitor, LP Brawler -- or around a player-controlled SO ship, since a human player is much better at maneuvering and managing flux than the AI, so of course a human player can make much better use of SO; or demonstrates it in the sim or against weaker enemies (i.e. "stick SO on ship X and look you can kill ship Y in sim easily"). I've yet to see someone actually show that SO is stronger than non-SO against endgame fleets, say double Ordos, outside of these cases. That's because the opposite is true; a non-SO Eradicator fleet will do much better against double Ordos than an SO Eradicator fleet, for example. So SO naturally becomes a non-factor at the endgame, so I don't see it as needing a change, despite the constant forum complaints about it from certain posters.

Safety Overrides is extremely powerful late game. Eradicator isn't fast enough despite the high base speed and is too focused on armor for safe active venting when SO goes best with a strong 360 front shield. You also save significant OP from not needing PD. Assault Chaingun also isn't very good against high armor and also it's nice to have an all purpose weapon (Heavy Blaster) when you have the flux to support the inefficiency. Small and medium ballistics are usually much nicer than energy slots, but small energy slots are great for close range and medium energy are fantastic for SO.

I don't normally use SO beyond the early game because it's boring and trivializes the content rather than because the power fades. I do agree that an SO flagship fades in relevance. The battles get too long for an SO flagship with a non-SO fleet, and it becomes difficult to safely approach if you're flying the only SO ship. There's also the Odyssey with 2x Plasma Cannon / 3x Sabot SRM Pod and Systems Expertise which plays a very similar role to an SO flagship with full capital tier PPT. Regardless, using SO for the entire fleet gets extremely strong once you get the proper ship for it: the Aurora. It was strong in 0.95.1a and it's substantially stronger in 0.96.

Elite Energy Weapon Mastery
Elite Field Modulation
(Elite) Ordnance Expertise
(Elite) Helmsmanship
Combat Endurance
Target Analysis

2x Heavy Blaster (3 work for anti-armor focus if not using all weapon slots)
1x Pulse Laser
7x IR Pulse Laser (replace front turret with emotional support PD for AI and can drop more for more capacitors)

7x Capacitors
35x Vents

Built-in Hardened Shields
Built-in Hardened Subsystems
Built-in Shield Conversion - Front
Safety Overrides
Solar Shielding

This ship ends up with 0.35 shield efficiency which is even better against Remnants due to Solar Shielding, giving it a ridiculously strong shield from the high flux capacity. Weapon/shield flux is more than covered by flux dissipation thanks to Ordnance Expertise (2736 dissipation) and Elite Energy Weapon Mastery. You can deal with any content in the game with a pure fleet of these with hardly any risk of a loss, or you can use them alongside aggressive Radiant builds. Odyssey works fine as a player flagship alongside them which is nice since flying one of these is very boring.

I usually go with Eradicators, Champions, Conquests, Onslaughts, etc. but now and then it's fun to play with an overpowered aggressive close range fleet. 0.96 has significantly buffed it. The problem is not the Aurora, which is a balanced ship without SO. SO Fury is quite strong too, although with much higher risk of AI losses largely due to the ship system. SO Eagle is also substantially better now thanks to the Eagle buffs (better flux stats and 10 speed are huge). Both SO Eagle and Brawler LP can also now get a full 360 shield via built-in Extended Shields (filling the role of the shield conversion for the Aurora).

11

General Discussion / Re: Current notes on 0.96a

« on: May 06, 2023, 05:21:00 PM »

Hmm. The effective mobility is about the same as the Odyssey, isn't it?

In AI hands, I agree with statement.  In player hands, I don't think so.  Mostly because Odyssey is a broadside/missile/carrier ship with a go-fast forward button, and the Retribution is a front facing gun ship with a go fast forward button.  The Odyssey can use its ship system to both get into, and out of trouble on a moment's notice when properly positioned.  Retribution can only use its system to get into trouble when bringing firepower to bear.

To be more specific, an Odyssey can come in at a roughly a 135 degree angle to enemy ships (nearly engine facing them), ready to move quickly away at a 45 degrees angle from the enemy ships, and still bring to bear 2 Plasma Cannons plus a large guided missiles, plus 3 guided missiles, plus 2 fighter wings.  And 4 small energy mounts I suppose.  At that same angle, a Retribution can bring to bear 6 small guided missiles, a large Ballistic, and 2 small ballistics.  Head on, it can bring to bear more firepower, so great at chasing down things weaker than it, but then it needs something like 5-10 seconds to turn even 90 degrees away to escape.  So less good at escaping things tougher and stronger than it.  Especially something like an Onslaught.  In that time turn time, Odyssey could have already moved 2-3 ship lengths away from incoming fire and be venting safely.

It's a completely different ship with the player using the ship system with Systems Expertise to flank and disengage when needed. AI tries to fly the Odyssey the same way it does the Conquest and the ship system doesn't fit with it. Odyssey's front small mount has broadside coverage too. 5x IR Pulse Lasers are 750 DPS with 0.8 flux efficiency, although it's nice to have a Tactical Laser in at least the front mount.

Spamming small missiles to get enough firepower on a ship that can focus 3 large ballistics raises some question marks for me. I am also surprised it has less armor than a midline battlecruiser noted for having reduced armor. And wow I did not realize it only had 2 small ballistics in the rear. No wonder it is so vulnerable to flankers - maybe more than a Legion.

4 support fighters are worth a lot and it has a ton of armor. Building in shield shunt means the Onslaught and Legion can have even armor than before at the expense of OP and the Legion got a big boost to OP.

12

General Discussion / Re: Missile slot balance between size is... dubious

« on: April 14, 2023, 03:21:47 PM »

Sabot SRM and Sabot SRM Pods are incredible on close range high tech ships where you can't do kinetic weapon spam. It's a huge part of why many of those ships work at all without SO. Medium tier sabots feel plentiful enough with Expanded Missile Racks where you don't need to heavily conserve them and can play very aggressively.

I find HE missiles far more useful than sabots on typical low tech ships. I do kinetic spam when possible which makes sabots much less useful. Sabots also don't work nearly as well at higher range since they move too slowly and get killed. Railgun, HVD and the buffed Arbalest Autocannon (when flux starved, like an Onslaught without HMG spam) are all great all around high damage kinetics. Mark IX Autocannon is decent. HE weapons are mediocre other than close range Devastator Cannon builds. Typhoon Reaper Launchers are solid for close range player ships. Breach SRM Pods are great for longer range ships. Annihilator Rocket Pods are solid in narrow cases such as winning a specific duel without taking nearby as much damage including taking out a Radiant with an kinetic spam Onslaught. They apply a ton of pressure and absorb a bunch of projectiles, both greatly reducing the damage you end up taking.

1x Cyclone Reaper Launcher is far better than 2x Typhoon Reaper Launcher and 1x Locust SRM Launcher is far better than 2x Breach SRM Pod. Squalls can be amazing for long range AI builds but ECCM is almost mandatory to make them work decently and they're also about to get nerfed, so this is a case where at least for player ships I think it's the other way around.

I don't find harpoons particularly useful for player ships but the AI handles them much better than reapers. I tend to use lots of small and medium harpoons on AI ships early game and then phase them out once I find better ships and weapons. Eradicators with 2x HVD and 1x Heavy Mauler (or even 3x HVD) are so good and have much better uses for OP than missiles. Will probably be using at least one Eagle in the next patch with a similar long range build adding Graviton Beams for the new anti-shield utility property, and I doubt I'll have a place for missiles there either.

Perhaps Missile Autoloader will make small missile slots significantly more valuable in the next patch.

13

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes

« on: April 14, 2023, 08:50:43 AM »

Something like Odyssey also really doesn't need omni, frontal gives full coverage and you'll mostly have enemies on the left/front left.
Basically never have defend both sides where I can't just keep 360° up.

Since the movement system only moves you forward, Odyssey is great at circling around and flanking. It can avoid getting swarmed that way without needing backup. Keeping enemies on the left by outrunning and circling around them works very well and the main benefit of more coverage would be again fighters, but those will still screw you over (especially Broadswords) if you try to tank them instead of quickly killing them (Locust SRM Launcher is amazing at a lot more than dealing with fighters, and 2x Xyphos helps too). Being able to raise the shield directly facing the enemies after venting greatly reduces how long it makes you vulnerable. Frequent active venting is part of what makes the player so strong compared to the AI. Running away as quickly as possible involves turning away and bursting past them, in which case they're behind you and your engines are facing them. If you're engaging the enemy as part of a battle line kiting back and forth, then I agree front shields don't hurt much but still hinder you when flanking. If you're alone, staying moving forward and active venting aggressively keeps you alive.

14

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes

« on: April 14, 2023, 08:03:24 AM »

Frontal shields are not always better. The AI is notoriously careless about flicking shields on and off; taking hits on armor when it doesn't have to and not accounting for the time it takes for a frontal shield to fully envelop the ship. Assume it's got bombers incoming on the side and it takes 3 seconds for the shield to cover the side. It's not calculating that or see it as a risk, at least not as far as I can see. Omni shields don't have that issue. Unless the conversion results in 360° coverage I'll usually not bother.

Accelerated shields help, and previously with upkeep cost reduction for free you'd consider slapping Accelerated on, too. Now it may be more of a Tough Decision.

Players can work around front shields better, but players can also take better advantage of omni shields if you fit it into your piloting. There are ships where front shield conversion is very obvious like the Aurora since 360° coverage is awesome and it has an easy time remaining facing almost any enemy. That's still going to be obvious without the flux cost discount and Aurora in particular is getting a buff which more than makes up for it. Slow turning ships get a lot of benefit from omni shields, especially if you're aggressively using active venting.

15

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes

« on: April 14, 2023, 07:17:32 AM »

It's not a matter of being underrated (Odyssey is definitely not underrated lol), I think the majority just prefers frontal shields for comfort. Juggling weapons and managing flux is already a big task on some ships, now having to steer your shield to block shots while doing all of that gets hectic quite fast. And the fact that it's impossible to rotate your shield without the camera also following your mouse. It's just a hassle for me, unless the ship has such a simple loadout, I don't need to manage anything (or where the majority of firepower is on hardpoints).

I haven't seen many people using the Odyssey and it typically gets rated under the Onslaught or Paragon as a player piloted ship. It's considered quite good but usually not top tier which is what I mean by underrated. Something can be widely regarded as very good while still being underrated. I personally didn't use it for a long time because I wasn't used to broadside ships or omni shields, and it wasn't hyped up as an incredible ship so I never put the effort into giving it a real shot. AI can't pilot it well but it's incredible as a player ship and is on a whole other level than those. I can't solo a typical Ordo fleet with an Onslaught or Paragon because they get swarmed and can't make nearly as much difference in a fleet battle with only burn drive. Charge-based ship systems get an extreme benefit from Systems Expertise and you can pick up BotB and the important technology skills by skipping Industry. It's unforgiving of mistakes but it's perfect as a player ship.

I really think a lot of it is that it feels useful to manually aim a primary ballistic/energy weapon even if autofire will usually do a better job with max target leading accuracy from skills. That cripples your ability to use omni shields and therefore omni shields are seen as something that's good for the AI but bad for players. The battle report mod helps with seeing that manually aiming weapons may actually often be making them less efficient in practice. There are certainly cases where manually aiming them allows for clever usage but I'm not sure it makes up for all the little inaccuracies/mistakes. Autofire currently has issues with the Tachyon Lance and Phase Lance but it seems the latest patch will be fixing that issue. Player can do smart things with both timing and aiming for those kinds of weapons such as aiming TL off center so the AI can't raise front shields in time to block it but at least once the bug is fixed I expect that autofire is overall much more efficient since it won't miss lots of shots vs. frigates, etc. and will properly track them as they move. I think it's very obvious that beam weapons work extremely well on autofire but it's very good at target leading for projectiles too when that's maxed.