Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25

Author Topic: Fighter Redesign  (Read 148963 times)

Sutopia

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1005
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #330 on: September 28, 2016, 10:32:27 PM »

Quick question, not sure if asked in previous discussion.
Do the fighters inherit anything from it's mothership? Like the officer skills and the hull mods.
Logged


Since all my mods have poor reputation, I deem my efforts unworthy thus no more updates will be made.

Deshara

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1578
  • Suggestion Writer
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #331 on: September 29, 2016, 10:58:43 AM »

No, nothing. Fighters are universal in that the ship that makes them doesn't affect them in any way, as far as I know atm the game doesn't even have a way of telling which fighter came from which
Logged
Quote from: Deshara
I cant be blamed for what I said 5 minutes ago. I was a different person back then

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3803
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #332 on: September 29, 2016, 11:49:29 AM »

Quick question, not sure if asked in previous discussion.
Do the fighters inherit anything from it's mothership? Like the officer skills and the hull mods.
The way stuff is hooked up, carrier stats don't affect fighter stats, aside from the carrier's CR (which is inherited by the fighters at the time of launch).
In the same post, Alex also indicated that officer skills can affect a carrier's fighters, though it's unclear if there will be any skills that actually do that prior to a full skill revamp (which is likely not coming with the next version).

No, nothing. Fighters are universal in that the ship that makes them doesn't affect them in any way, as far as I know atm the game doesn't even have a way of telling which fighter came from which
This is true in the current game, but definitely won't be true in the next version.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Morrokain

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2143
  • Megalith Dreadnought - Archean Order
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #333 on: November 08, 2016, 07:23:35 PM »

Just thought of this, but now that fighters are"infinite" at last in terms of never completely going away, are going to have a weapon hint or AI missile use changes to ignore them? It's not a super huge thing in vanilla I don't think, but some modded weapons target them even with the strike weapon hint under certain circumstances if the missile itself is fast enough to hit one.
Logged

Morgan Rue

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #334 on: November 19, 2016, 12:14:54 PM »

Idea for fighters, limiting what ships can mount what fighters, and making significant differences between dedicated and combat carriers. Instead of doing something like "These are small fighters, they can be used in small hangars", limit the OP that each launch bay can use for fighters. Say you have a Shepherd(I know this ship isn't going to have an actual launch bay, but for the sake of this example I assume it does). It doesn't make sense for that ship to be able to use and maintain high end "big" fighters, like a Xyphos heavy fighter wing. But it does have the capacity to launch and maintain "small" fighters, like the Borer mining drones it comes equipped with. So lets have a limit on the OP in fighters that the Shepherd can equip, something like 2 or 3. So the Shepherd can equip any fighter in its launch bay, as long as that fighter costs 3 or less OP.

Lets look at the Condor. Its a relatively low tech ship, so it probably shouldn't be able to use something as advanced as Xyphos heavy fighters or Trident bombers. But it is a dedicated carrier, so it should be able to use a good number of fighters, even if it is the smallest carrier(2nd in this example to Shepherd). So it has 2-3 launch bays, but those bays can only equip fighters that cost less than 3-4 OP, things like Piranhas, Broadswords, Mining Pods, Talons, and maybe even Thunders, Daggers, Warthogs and Gladius, but definitely not Tridents. Maybe it even has one "bigger" launch bay and one "smaller" launch bay. So the "bigger" launch bay can use fighters that cost 5 or less OP, while the smaller one can only use fighters that cost 2 or less OP.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2016, 12:22:24 PM by Morgan Rue »
Logged
Dauntless.

SafariJohn

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3021
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #335 on: February 18, 2017, 07:59:48 PM »

I don't recall anyone asking, do fighters explode when their carrier dies like current drones or do they keep fighting?
Logged

Dri

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #336 on: February 18, 2017, 08:16:42 PM »

I think they keep fighting for a little while and then fly offscreen (retreat).
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 24114
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #337 on: February 18, 2017, 08:31:45 PM »

Yeah, exactly.
Logged

whatdoesthisbuttondo

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #338 on: February 19, 2017, 01:38:58 AM »

Idea for fighters, limiting what ships can mount what fighters, and making significant differences between dedicated and combat carriers.

This could be done by making launch bays sized similar to current weapons, e.g. "small/medium/large" bays.

I've some carriers in early-concept stage, most of them actually carrier escort type ships, and I'd really like
to restrict what they actually can do, as the description sometimes goes along the lines of

"transport converted into a makeship carrier escort, can support a small interceptor wing for system patrol duty"
Logged

ChaseBears

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #339 on: February 19, 2017, 05:59:11 AM »

I think the theory atm is that you do that with OP.  Bombers cost an arm and a leg compared to Talons.

Logged
If I were creating the world I wouldn’t mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o’clock, Day One!

Sy

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1225
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #340 on: February 19, 2017, 08:07:17 AM »

not all bombers are expensive, Piranha and Kopesh (new rocket bomber) cost 10 OP each, assuming they didn't get changed recently. Wasps on the other hand are probably quite expensive, despite being tiny interceptors.

but it's still possible to limit a flight deck to a specific wing by just making it built-in. of course that means it's not customizable at all rather than just being limited to "only interceptors" or "only cheap wings". but i think adding additional complexity with something like weapon-like size classes isn't really necessary if it can be limited either by OP restraints or to one built-in wing, at least in vanilla.
could be handy to have some additional options for modding though, especially for factions like Diable or Templars, with their rather unique fighter design/balance.
Logged

whatdoesthisbuttondo

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #341 on: February 19, 2017, 01:08:51 PM »

could be handy to have some additional options for modding though, especially for factions like Diable or Templars, with their rather unique fighter design/balance.

Yea, I was thinking about the Storm from DA, given that one would probably need somewhere in the ballpark of +150 OP for fighters, and with the already
plenty of firepower it has now, things might end up with carriers becoming just better battlecruisers and players ignoring fighters.

I mean, that ship pretty much is a combination of battlecruiser and carrier, so from a min-maxer perspective, it would be logical to crank up one of those to the max.
Logged

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2847
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #342 on: February 19, 2017, 02:09:28 PM »

could be handy to have some additional options for modding though, especially for factions like Diable or Templars, with their rather unique fighter design/balance.

Yea, I was thinking about the Storm from DA, given that one would probably need somewhere in the ballpark of +150 OP for fighters, and with the already
plenty of firepower it has now, things might end up with carriers becoming just better battlecruisers and players ignoring fighters.

I mean, that ship pretty much is a combination of battlecruiser and carrier, so from a min-maxer perspective, it would be logical to crank up one of those to the max.
The Storm is losing half of its decks and getting re classed as a cruiser, if it doesn't get cut out completely
Logged
Help out MesoTroniK, a modder in need

2021 is 2020 won
2022 is 2020 too

ANGRYABOUTELVES

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
  • AE ALTADOON GHARTOK PADHOME
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #343 on: February 19, 2017, 02:54:03 PM »

Yea, I was thinking about the Storm from DA, given that one would probably need somewhere in the ballpark of +150 OP for fighters, and with the already plenty of firepower it has now, things might end up with carriers becoming just better battlecruisers and players ignoring fighters.

I mean, that ship pretty much is a combination of battlecruiser and carrier, so from a min-maxer perspective, it would be logical to crank up one of those to the max.
In terms of weaponry that can point forward the Storm has 3 hybrid mediums, 1 universal medium, 4 hybrid smalls and 3 universal smalls. Covering the rear it has 1 medium hybrid and 2 small hybrids. Missile-wise it has 4 small missile slots on the side, limiting them to tracking missiles, and 8 built-in Micro Missile Launchers on the other side. It costs 35 supplies to deploy and has 7 burn, the ship system is four built-in Frost fighters.

Compare this to the Haze, a DA cruiser. The Haze has, pointing forward, 4 hybrid mediums, 1 universal medium, 2 hybrid smalls, and 2 medium missile mounts; since they point forward, they can mount non-tracking torpedoes such as the Typhoon Reaper Launcher. Covering the rear it has 2 hybrid smalls, and there are 4 small missile slots on the side. It costs 28 supplies to deploy and has 8 burn, the ship system is essentially a weirder Accelerated Ammo Feeder that works with energy weapons.

Overall, the Haze has slightly better non-fighter weaponry than the Storm while being easier to support logistically, even without taking into account the Flux Redirection System. If you limit the Storm to Talons, even if you give it infinite OP, it would still be limited by the very small number of weapon mounts for a battle-cruiser. I mean, everything fighter-related is inevitably going to need to be rebalanced and as DA is a fighter-focused faction it will need rebalancing especially so, but I don't think that the Storm-with-only-Talons would be a better battle-cruiser than, say, the Maelstrom or the Chronos.
Logged

whatdoesthisbuttondo

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 90
    • View Profile
Re: Fighter Redesign
« Reply #344 on: February 19, 2017, 03:19:53 PM »

The thing is, 4-5 extra hullmods are a tremendous amplifier, translating into better range on weapons,
stronger shields and more resilient hull.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25