Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Planet Search Overhaul (07/13/24)

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5

Author Topic: The Ion Pulser & Development Process  (Read 33498 times)

Schwartz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1453
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #30 on: January 16, 2016, 09:02:41 PM »

This is freakin' cool.
Logged

Achataeon

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
  • ~stare~
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #31 on: January 16, 2016, 09:37:40 PM »

That Aurora though. I could already imagine 7 AM blasters on that thing. Looking forward for them patch notes
Logged
"On average, a human has one breast and one testicle"
- Vsauce, Michael here

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12245
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #32 on: January 17, 2016, 06:24:21 AM »

are there any other ships planned that use these mounts, besides Aurora? like Medusa... putting two Light Needlers on that already very powerful ship always kinda felt like cheating. ^^
Not to me.  Medusa does not need that kind of nerf.  It will certainly kill the Needler and Phase Beam combo.  Needlers and Heavy Blaster is too hard to support without removing Hardened Subsystems or other must-have hullmod.  (I use railguns if I mount heavy blasters.)  Also, two light needlers is less ballistics than the what Enforcer and Hammerhead can bring.  Moving within weapons range of most ships in a fragile ship (more so than Sunder)... Medusa needs to be powerful.

I wish Wolf and Aurora could use some ballistics so they can use Phase Lance effectively.  As is, Phase Lance is only good for Paragon or smaller ships that can use ballistics.

EDIT:  It would not be so bad if energy had a 700+ range light and/or medium weapon that could hit for hard flux and decent damage, even if it had top OP cost for its size.  So far, most of the best beam users are midline ships, due to having access to ballistics.  High-tech without ballistics are stuck with short-ranged pulse lasers and blasters to punch above their weight on their own.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2016, 09:41:20 AM by Megas »
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 24501
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #33 on: January 17, 2016, 11:40:26 AM »

are there any other ships planned that use these mounts, besides Aurora? like Medusa... putting two Light Needlers on that already very powerful ship always kinda felt like cheating. ^^
Not to me.  Medusa does not need that kind of nerf.  It will certainly kill the Needler and Phase Beam combo.  Needlers and Heavy Blaster is too hard to support without removing Hardened Subsystems or other must-have hullmod.  (I use railguns if I mount heavy blasters.)  Also, two light needlers is less ballistics than the what Enforcer and Hammerhead can bring.  Moving within weapons range of most ships in a fragile ship (more so than Sunder)... Medusa needs to be powerful.

I thought about it for the Medusa, yeah. Might eventually replace those w/ "synergy", heavy emphasis on "might". The range on that light needler is just so good, combined with a high-tech ship's mobility. I wonder how much the Medusa's stock would tumble if those were replaced w/ "synergy".


I think this is related (if not a direct result) of twitter banter between me and Alex. I am proud that my little idea baby grew up into such a sweet sweet weapon.

Could well be, yeah :)


I wish Wolf and Aurora could use some ballistics so they can use Phase Lance effectively.  As is, Phase Lance is only good for Paragon or smaller ships that can use ballistics.

(Had some fun the other day running a Phase Lance loadout on that new phase destroyer...)
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12245
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #34 on: January 17, 2016, 01:35:18 PM »

are there any other ships planned that use these mounts, besides Aurora? like Medusa... putting two Light Needlers on that already very powerful ship always kinda felt like cheating. ^^
Not to me.  Medusa does not need that kind of nerf.  It will certainly kill the Needler and Phase Beam combo.  Needlers and Heavy Blaster is too hard to support without removing Hardened Subsystems or other must-have hullmod.  (I use railguns if I mount heavy blasters.)  Also, two light needlers is less ballistics than the what Enforcer and Hammerhead can bring.  Moving within weapons range of most ships in a fragile ship (more so than Sunder)... Medusa needs to be powerful.

I thought about it for the Medusa, yeah. Might eventually replace those w/ "synergy", heavy emphasis on "might". The range on that light needler is just so good, combined with a high-tech ship's mobility. I wonder how much the Medusa's stock would tumble if those were replaced w/ "synergy".
To answer the question, I do not think Medusa would be much less effective (because dual Heavy Blasters are so good, just annoyingly short-ranged) but it would reduce the number of top-tier configurations available.  All of my Medusa would use the same one, maybe two, configurations instead of three or four.

If hardpoints became synergy, I would abandon Phase Lance on Medusa since it cannot back them up with attacks that deal hard flux (aside from IR Pulse Laser with only 500 range - too short).  Unless the new ion weapons are Templar overpowered, I would use either Pulse Laser or Heavy Blasters exclusively for medium mounts, depending on skills.  In the hardpoints that become synergy, I would probably use one among the following:  Tactical Laser to prevent AI from lowering shields at 600+ range, Salamander or Ion Cannon for disabling, Reapers for alpha strike, or single Harpoon/Sabot for no OP cost.

Currently, I sometimes use Phase Lance on Medusa if I have Advanced Optics hullmod and Needlers to spare.  If neither are available, Phase Lance gets dropped because it is overshadowed by Pulse Laser or Heavy Blaster (same range, but does hard flux).
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 24501
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #35 on: January 17, 2016, 01:46:33 PM »

Thanks for the extra info. Sounds like a pretty good argument for keeping them as-is, then, at least for the time being, given the weapon options.
Logged

Dri

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #36 on: January 17, 2016, 02:48:00 PM »

Are the empty weapon slot covers still going in? I think they are a nifty addition.
Logged

Toxcity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #37 on: January 17, 2016, 03:53:29 PM »

This looks awesome, though I'm a little sad that the Ion Pulser is stuck at 450 range. Looking forward to the patch notes!
Logged

Gezzaman

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 92
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #38 on: January 17, 2016, 04:56:45 PM »

that EMP damage looks scary, good job!
Logged

icepick37

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1788
  • Go.
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #39 on: January 17, 2016, 07:32:16 PM »

(Had some fun the other day running a Phase Lance loadout on that new phase destroyer...)
Triple phase lance on the sunder is surprisingly fun, too, fyi.
Logged
“I [may] not agree with a word that you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”
- Voltaire

Achataeon

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
  • ~stare~
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #40 on: January 17, 2016, 11:20:57 PM »

(Had some fun the other day running a Phase Lance loadout on that new phase destroyer...)

Alex is practically screaming 3 Synergy on that new phase destroyer. How about those rear small mounts? Hybrid? Or plain ol' energy?
Logged
"On average, a human has one breast and one testicle"
- Vsauce, Michael here

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12245
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #41 on: January 18, 2016, 05:27:15 AM »

(Had some fun the other day running a Phase Lance loadout on that new phase destroyer...)
Triple phase lance on the sunder is surprisingly fun, too, fyi.
Sunder can support triple phase lance with needlers when beams alone are not enough.

Phase Lance (with Advanced Optics) is great when target has poor dissipation or is nearly fluxed out.  Against current phase ships or any ship powerful shields, not so much.
Logged

Doom101

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 641
  • Doom will always find you.
    • View Profile
    • Youtube channel
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #42 on: January 18, 2016, 07:54:09 AM »

For some reason I read "Ion" as "Iron" in the title of the blog post, I was very pleasantly surprised by brand new ion weapons, one of my favorite things.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that thought that first animation for the spinning barrels was lackluster, that second one though, very nice, I can't say exactly what that reminds me of but definitely something I've seen from sci fi. Possibly anti-fighter deck guns from some show or movie but I digress, I can already see throwing one of these ion pulsers on my flagship wolf and flanking some poor fool between myself and something else, probably an enforcer.

Also I've always thought of ion weapons as condensed pirate-begone their lack of shields make ion weapons, particularly devastating. These new additions to the arsenal will certainly be appreciated.
Logged
When you can't go on, just accept your doom. It comes to all, it is inevitable.

Also I totally had the name BEFORE the cruiser.

Sy

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1225
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #43 on: January 18, 2016, 12:44:26 PM »

I do not think Medusa would be much less effective (because dual Heavy Blasters are so good, just annoyingly short-ranged) but it would reduce the number of top-tier configurations available.  All of my Medusa would use the same one, maybe two, configurations instead of three or four.
that's a good point. Medusa always felt somewhat op (as flagship) to me, since it strikes such a great balance between mobility, survivability and offensive power. but i suppose you're right in that taking away the Universals would really just reduce its flexibility, not its damage potential.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12245
    • View Profile
Re: The Ion Pulser & Development Process
« Reply #44 on: January 18, 2016, 01:55:27 PM »

Before 0.65, my Medusa used two Heavy Blasters, two single Harpoons, and four burst PD, and soloed fleets with ease (thanks to unlimited peak performance at the time).  Two Heavy Blasters with or without ballistics is still the most powerful Medusa configuration.  I do not use Needlers on Medusa with two Heavy Blasters because they cost too much OP without giving up either capacitors or Hardened Subsystems.  Even Railguns is squeezing capacitors a bit too close for comfort.  Today, two Phase Lances with Advanced Optics combined with Needlers is another powerful option that can compete with Heavy Blasters.  It trades some raw DPS for extra range and ease-of-use, especially by AI.  One disadvantage of using ballistics with Medusa is you cannot alpha strike with them.  Only missiles or AM blasters will let Medusa output strike-level damage.

Changing universals to synergies would just reduce Medusa's flexibility, not power.

That said, perhaps the new Ion Pulser will make a Safety Override configuration for Medusa a good idea, and expand the number of competitive endgame configurations.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5