Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

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.

Messages - Embolism

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 33
I hope built-in hullmods like sensor array on the Apogee gets the S-mod bonus. Otherwise you get the weird situation with the Venture where having something built-in locks you out of getting something better (Venture can't use converted hangars because it already has a *** mining drone - it really should be able to use it to get rid of the drones for something else).

General Discussion / Re: How giga is the Gigacannon?
« on: January 04, 2023, 06:54:58 PM »
So we can actually figure out how much flux the Gigacannon uses per second by the screenshot in the blogpost.

We know that at the time of the blogpost, Kinetic Cannons are 400 flux/second[1]. The screenshot Executor has 5x Heavy Needlers, 4x Kinetic Blasters, 4x Burst PDLs, 1x Dual Flak and 2x Gigacannons; for a weapon flux/second of 3210.

So the flux/second of its weapons that we know about are 5x200 + 4x400 + 4x40 + 150 plus two Gigacannons. That means a Gigacannon uses ( 3210 - 2910 ) / 2 = 150 flux/second.

Which means the Gigacannon must be really, REALLY slow-firing as it uses barely more flux/second than the small AM blaster.

It has the same anti-shield DPS - and pretty much all other stats except for flux cost - as a Heavy Blaster; I'm still working out what the flux/shot should be. Right now it's at 400 (for 250 kinetic), which has felt ok in testing but sounds a bit too low on paper; maybe it ought to be 450... it pretty clearly ought to be below 500, though, so that it's better anti-shield than the PL.

General Discussion / Re: How giga is the Gigacannon?
« on: December 30, 2022, 11:26:27 PM »
Why do people think the Gigacannon will have less than 700 range? The blog post says:

A high-tech ship could use it well – flux efficiency is a valuable stat, and it wouldn’t mind the range since it’s no worse than the range of its usual armaments.

Given the lowest range a large energy weapon has is 700, I think the Gigacannon will be 700 as well. Sub-600 range doesn't just make it awkward on the Executor, it makes it completely unusable for basically every ship that can mount large energies.

General Discussion / Re: Does the campaign use dynamic ship generation?
« on: December 30, 2022, 11:25:23 PM »
They adhere to a variant but can replace various weapons with other weapons that fill the same role. I believe it's meant to be dynamic depending on the market it spawned from, an unstable market will spawn ships with more of its high end weapons replaced with low end equivalents.

General Discussion / Re: How giga is the Gigacannon?
« on: December 29, 2022, 06:03:14 PM »
I'm expecting it to basically be an antimatter blaster with 700 range and a ROF of about 20 shots a minute, so DPS of 1400/3=467.

Suggestions / Re: Simplify Missile Autoreloader
« on: December 28, 2022, 05:06:38 PM »
All these limited use missile reloads are basically just flat increases to ammo capacity with extra steps. The Gryphon's Missile Autoforge is, again, an area where this could be massively simplified (and free up its systems slot).

IMO all these missile reloader effects should either be infinite with limitations, or just what this topic says: a simple ammo bonus.

Suggestions / Re: Give the pulse laser a bonus vs shields
« on: December 24, 2022, 11:56:56 PM »
The only change I want to see to the pulse laser is... make it an actual laser! That's right, turn it into a crappy beam weapon.

Before the IR Autolance was revealed I'd say this would be actually feasible, but now probably not since trying to make it viable would make it too similar to the Autolance. But really my only reason for this change is because it always irked me that the pulse lasers shoot projectiles that obviously aren't lasers.

Suggestions / Re: Lion's Guard "Special Modifications" Banner Color
« on: December 07, 2022, 03:24:16 AM »
That's honestly way more cheesy than the opposite. Genius Benevolent Mary Sue Overlord who is not a starship engineer introduces an Amazing Innovation that somehow eluded dozens of generations of professional shipbuilders in the Domain, saving Millions of Lives and earning the Eternal Loyalty of his people.

I'm sure I've read this in a few Isekais.

Suggestions / Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« on: December 07, 2022, 01:28:54 AM »
If you want an Eagle that will actually deal damage, Phase Lances are by far the best choice. I don't know why some are still so adamant they're a bad pick. Not every Eagle build needs to have HVDs jeez. I already showed how a simple Eagle build can actually pack a punch, even at current cost. Reduce it to 17 DP and I'll abuse the hell out of it.

I'll post videos here after the patch, just so I can stop listening to "phase lance bad".

And part of the reason why it's a good choice is because of advanced optics letting it match range with 700-800 range ballistics, which is why the real problem with the Eagle is its range mismatch.

Suggestions / Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« on: December 06, 2022, 09:36:48 AM »
A boring alternative to giving the energy bolt coherer to the Eagle (which I agree doesn't make sense thematically) would be to give it advanced optics. This doesn't really affect the 1000 range beams, but it does make phase lances more viable and as a bonus buffs the Eagle's PD capabilities - since the Eagle is apparently meant to be a defensive line cruiser, buffing it's PD net (as opposed to giving it a high tech grade shield) makes sense.

Plus there's already precedent in the Astral getting built in advanced optics so it's not too out of place.

Suggestions / Re: Lion's Guard "Special Modifications" Banner Color
« on: December 06, 2022, 06:27:34 AM »
It should be a normal hullmod, as long as the downsides are something insignificant like +1% casualties and -1% repair speed then I don't care if it isn't restorable. If it actually has a negligible upside too then even better.

Suggestions / Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« on: December 06, 2022, 12:11:06 AM »
I honestly think that the range disparity between its nose-mounted ballistics and its butt-mounted energies is the main problem with the Eagle. Tweaking flux stats and DP costs does nothing to address this. The alternative is to make the Eagle faster, but we already have that and it's called the Falcon.

The upcoming IR autolance is touted as a "solution" to this but by all accounts it seems to be an anti-fighter weapon with negligible effect on anything larger than a frigate.

If the Apex is getting a range boost for its energy weapons with the energy bolt coherer then the Eagle can too. Being able to match pulse laser or heavy blaster range with its ballistics would IMO solve 90% of its problems, and also serves to make the Eagle more "unique".

All other suggestions just makes the Eagle more similar to existing combat ships. Large mounts? Champion. Better flux stats? Aurora, it's starting to get hard to tell which one's high tech and which one's midline if you just look at their flux stats. More speed? Falcon. Less DP? Might as well slap on some mining drones and call it a Venture.

Suggestions / Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« on: December 05, 2022, 06:01:12 PM »
A line cruiser costing less DP than a light cruiser (Fury) and fast cruiser (Eradiator) honestly feels... wrong. Yes the Fury is high-tech and the Eradicator isn't "light" but... it just ain't right.

Feels like the Eagle got done dirty, instead of being a proper line cruiser feels like we're just acknowledging it is a failed product and are putting it on discount, "clearance sale 23% off all stocks must go!"

Suggestions / Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« on: December 05, 2022, 04:35:49 PM »
I'll save that for the patch notes; those aren't too too far off :D


General Discussion / Re: Next Update?
« on: December 05, 2022, 01:07:51 AM »
The next update is close. When Alex starts posting minor QoL changes on twitter, patch notes tend to follow.  ;D

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 33