I was talking about the player. In terms of dealing more damage when it matters: you may enjoy a more aggressive player ships like an aurora, SO ship, phase ship, Sunder, tempest etc, or you may enjoy a ship with more missiles, such as the dominator, onslaught, conquest, etc.
Either option lets you pick and choose when to apply a burst of damage: usually enough to destroy a ship of the same weight class in one or two passes, though capitals have a lot of hull to chew through.
You don't get what I mean, I meant that giving AI too much damage and forgetting their survivability is pointless most of the times, they won't be able to do damage when they're dead, so I can see why you'd go Point Defense and Impact Mitigation for them.
But even a player that isn't "the best ever" can avoid what the AI can't so they can pretty much always pick a generalist approach, or in most cases, the damage side, since not only is it going to fit most of the situations, it'll do so better.
ok, maybe i didnt read everything everyone has wrote cos well, you saw your last message, AND i get carried away with prose smithery sometimes. I make myself snigger. Sue me.
But you are ignoring my point. what I gave was an EXAMPLE of why your opinion, is.... well its your opinion. Its not everyones. You dont play carriers, obviously. Nor phase ships. What you should be doing is realising that OTHER people use these skills. What you are missing here is perspective, that the choice that is being made is the PLAYSTYLE THAT REQUIRES THAT SKILL CHOICE.
From other peoples perspective, your favourite skill is the pointless one.
YOur playstyle is the choice that youve made, which is iterated at every skill tier.
Don't worry, opinions can also be wrong since this isn't a matter of "preference". This is a matter of efficiency, and in the confines of this binary choice, the only meaningful choices are like three on all trees.
I'll tell you one thing though, when you're trying to appeal to your customers, you don't listen to the 5%, you listen to the 95%. I'll assure you that psychologically, most will not gimp themselves and pick the worst option unless they're kind of done with your game so they're trying to squeeze it dry, it's actually really their playstyle, or they don't know better.
Carriers suck right now, and their skills do not help them pretty much at all is the issue here, so why would you ever go carrier? Let's actually forget the part where carriers suck. Why would you not go generalist and still go carrier because the skills don't factor in at all because the carrier skills suck? You'd do better as a carrier if you'd pick the generalist side, it's certainly more useful.
Phase ships are your only example and you keep on bashing them on the head, but even there, the only one that is TRULY needed is operating time, while the other is useless since you don't have shields, but that's the only playstyle difference, mostly because of game mechanics.
Again, this skill system isn't good.
part of the problem with the picks is that you pick this generalist skill or this specialist skill, but it isn't consistent. I can turn into a carrier specialist and a ranged specialist and a phase specialist.
What I am trying to say is that in the one by one the vs of the skills isn't interesting, and there doeesn't seem to be clear specialization branches. in the tree
because it isn't a tree but a sequence.
So we have no sense of progression and on a one vs one the generalist might win over the specialist time and again.
at least in the L tree
Worse running a fleet, it should be less about generalist/specialsit and more about the role to take centerstage
Will carriers be auxiliaries or core? (assuming a partial denerf) are your phase ships the core of the fleet or harrassers? are you running a battleline as the core? or just an anchor for the phase ships? or a shieldwall for your carriers?
again with a lineal progression this jsut doesn't work. generalist is going to be more useful, by and large, with a few exceptions here or there
I fully agree even though I'm not the type to argue from this perspective, this seems like a more interesting option than what we have now.
This actually brings up an issue I have here in this game and has never been fixed:
The lack of tactics and how commands are very poorly implemented. If only we could have something like Battle Brothers now that that was mentioned, even a shieldwall would make fights more interesting.
