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.

31

General Discussion / Re: Vanguard is terrible

« on: January 21, 2022, 02:39:32 AM »

Vanguard is basically a Centurion with a Shield Shunt. 50% more supplies usage, also more expensive to purchase. Shield Shunt being a hull mod of questionable value in the first place.

I'm not being hyperbolic here, Vanguard is so bad I will not use it in my fleet. It's a detriment to my fleet by taking up a slot and crew/supply losses when it is inevitably destroyed in every single battle with a actually dangerous enemy.

If people want to pretend it's in a okay place, that it's got it's uses, feel free to pretend that. It's a cool ship, I like the concept, but it doesn't do it's job to an acceptable level.

32

General Discussion / Re: Atlas - Most useful ship in the game?

« on: January 21, 2022, 02:23:36 AM »

I can't justify using SP on support ships.

What we need is the logistics hull mods cap removed, because the cap serves no actual function in the game but to make QoL support hull mods unavailable.

"I don't think installing more than two logistic hull mods is worth spending SP points"

"I want to be able to put on more than two logistic hull mods"

I can't really square these. The game is presenting you with an interesting choice that grew dynamically from the system interactions between hull mods and story points and the conclusion is there shouldn't be a choice proposed to begin with?

What is there to square? Those mod don't get taken almost ever because of limited OP or specifically limited SP, the only ships with the OP can't take them because of the arbitrary limit. Those SP shouldn't have to be spent on secondary fleet bonuses, which are frankly minor, when the combat ships need them more for survival and fighting power.

The logistics limit exists for no reason. There is no balance argument that can be made for it continuing to enforce it.

I reject the hard choices need to be made argument here, just like I did for the last skills system. Choices like that should be required for balance, not just because games use systems like that.

33

General Discussion / Re: Atlas - Most useful ship in the game?

« on: January 20, 2022, 01:37:06 AM »

I can't justify using SP on support ships.

What we need is the logistics hull mods cap removed, because the cap serves no actual function in the game but to make QoL support hull mods unavailable.

34

General Discussion / Re: Phase Anchor is absurdly overpowered.

« on: January 19, 2022, 01:37:19 AM »

I have a hard time taking this seriously given the ship and weapons being used. Looks to me very much like PA has little to do with it and it's just making something brokenly strong stronger.

35

General Discussion / Re: Derelict Operations v. Destroyed Ship Recovery mechanics. Needs fix.

« on: January 17, 2022, 02:06:26 AM »

I support removing the recovery limit, I'm not even sure why it exist.

36

General Discussion / Re: Vanguard is terrible

« on: January 15, 2022, 02:40:19 AM »

The dampener also more or less acts as a safe flux vent for the ship.

I find the concept of using the dampener to vent to be laughable.

@Locklave: That's quite rude. Please be more respectful towards other forum members in the future.

I disagree. You are assuming the context is specifically directed at the person and not directed at the idea presented.

My experience as stated is the ship explodes long before a vent would be required making venting as a whole a non issue. Thus funny.

If Haresus felt attacked by my statement, apologies, but I wasn't attacking him or intending rudeness directed at him. He also wasn't the only one to mention this if I'm correct, also part of why I didn't directly quote him.

37

General Discussion / Re: Vanguard is terrible

« on: January 14, 2022, 01:42:42 AM »

Neat, pretty well, okay. These are not words anyone should be using to describe a premium frigate performance.

It shouldn't need officers with specific skills to be good, it shouldn't even need an officer too be good. Nor should it require player control. It isn't a late or even mid game ship, people need to stop pretending that's the case. Redacted swat Vanguard like a fly.

It's okay against early game trash enemies that lack advanced weaponry and missile capacity, which is sad because the Lasher is still better at that.

Also I checked something. I can buy and restore a LP Lasher for less then the Vanguard costs, which isn't cheap by any means. I don't have words to express how much that bothers me.

38

General Discussion / Re: Vanguard is terrible

« on: January 13, 2022, 03:48:40 PM »

I find the concept of using the dampener to vent to be laughable.

Vanguard auto vents all it's flux when it explodes, which by the way is before flux gets anywhere near full.

39

General Discussion / Re: Vanguard is terrible

« on: January 13, 2022, 02:45:55 AM »

... I think lashers suck too, so saying they're maybe better than lashers is not saying much to me lol.

Lashers are a low end ship, they do well for what they are and what they cost. That taken you are absolutely correct.

40

General Discussion / Vanguard is terrible

« on: January 12, 2022, 02:01:35 PM »

It's not a premium heavy low tech frigate and does not fill any role in a fleet except that ship that explodes 45 seconds into every fight.

Dampening field
When it was being described, back before it's inclusion in the game, I clearly misunderstood how it was intended to work. It is functionally useless as it exists. I incorrectly assumed it would function when the ship is actually trading fire with the enemy, which would actually make it a useful system. 600 armor is a joke without shields and no other real way to mitigate damage.

Rugged Construction
Specialization in failure. It needs a system that prevents it from being destroyed every fight. This doesn't make up for anything, it still costs you tons of crew and supplies to recover it every fight.

Damage output
Too low due to terrible survival time, too low due to weapons ranges. Why didn't this ship get a Ballistic Rangefinder?

Cost
4 times the cost of a Lasher. The Lasher is a better ship, I would take 1 Lasher over a Vanguard in all cases.

This ship is meant to be good in AI control.

Imagine throwing 20 of these at a station. Not gonna happen even against a level 1 station.
Now imagine throwing 20 Lashers at that station. Interesting that the Lashers might actually be able to win the fight.

Put simply, I do not want this ship in my fleet. I will never buy one or recover one and if I get one for free I'll mothball it till I can sell it. That makes me a sad panda.

41

Suggestions / Re: Shield Shunt and lack of support roles

« on: January 12, 2022, 01:55:00 AM »

Some considerations:

• Not "wasting" (hard) flux on shields means a shield shunting ship has tons of extra flux for weapons
• Even blacked out armor has 5% of the full armor value, meaning all hull damage is reduced
• Shield shunt has strong synergy modifications (heavy armor, armored turrets, reinforced bulkheads, blast doors)
• Weapon incapacitations become less frequent and last shorter with modifications + officer skills

Shield shunt was recently nerfed from 25% to 15% because it was considered too strong. On its own for general use it is absolutely terrible, but as a synergy piece for specific loadouts on certain ships I think it is pretty good.

It was nerfed because of the skill for D mods that got replaced. It shouldn't have been nerfed and it is currently useless.

I know people talk about how you can stack 5-6 skills and many hull mods into making it good but that's absurd. May as well get a normal ship at that point.

42

Suggestions / Improve colony leaders

« on: January 05, 2022, 02:21:28 AM »

They are far too costly 20,000 and are completely overshadowed AI cores. Finding one on salvage is not a good thing, you need to fire them asap or they milk you for 2000 a month doing nothing. Finding extremely skilled ones isn't a thing anymore so finding them isn't working like that captain you find with 7 skills 5 of them elite.

Frankly they aren't worth it in their current form. Colonies aren't the money printing machines they once were.

43

General Discussion / Re: Logistics hull mods cap

« on: January 05, 2022, 02:15:50 AM »

EO is one of those top tier logistics slots that lock out others. I wish they were all that functional in and out of combat.

44

General Discussion / Re: Logistics hull mods cap

« on: January 03, 2022, 04:53:31 AM »

Based on everything I've read in here and experienced personally in gameplay I believe the following.

There are 2 simple problems.
1. Too many logistic hull mods are underpowered relative to OP cost, thus never used.
2. Limiting the number of logistics hull mods at 2 raises the bar so high that even some of the more decent logistic hull mods never get touched regardless of OP.

There are 2 simple solutions.
1. Lesser logistics hull mods need to be improved or have the cost lowered.
2. The logistics limit needs to be removed, I have seen no real argument for it's continued existence.

No one is taking down a Redacted fleet with a bunch of Colossus freighters because the cap got lifted. The meta wouldn't be dramatically changed, aside from support ships actually supporting the fleet better. I don't see any downsides to this.

Honestly these solutions would just be a QoL improvement to the game.

45

General Discussion / Re: Logistics hull mods cap

« on: January 02, 2022, 04:16:41 AM »

The reason the unused logistics hullmods aren't used is because they aren't competitive with the ones that are used, therefore aren't considered till the player has nothing better to do with their OP/slots. Having a low cap on logistics hullmods doesn't create the issue, it "just" exposes and aggravates it*.

*With a logistics mod limit of N, a mod needs to be in the top N mods for that situation to be installed. Higher values of N make it easier for the mod to get in, but also the question arises of why the mod never makes it into a constrained top list.

I feel this expresses my feeling on the issue more accurately. That is very specifically the issue.