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: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6

Author Topic: S-burn balance....  (Read 24015 times)

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #15 on: April 22, 2017, 07:58:24 AM »

SB definitely feels OP overall. Player can always be sure that he can outrun (and often catch) anything, no matter how slow are ships in fleet.

I think if SB speed remains the same, acceleration has to be much lower.
Acceleration also should not restore instantly when ending SB.
Logged

Darloth

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #16 on: April 22, 2017, 08:07:54 AM »

It might be complex to calculate, but you could make the speed boost (and acceleration nerf) directly proportional to the distance to the target.

Really far away? You get the full +10 burn, and weak acceleration.

As you get closer to your plotted target, you get progressively less speed increase.

This would require you can only use it pointed at something.  You could still use it on a fleet to get closer to them, but you could never catch a faster/equal fleet with it because you'd always be at normal speed by the time you were, say, 300 units away.

Used in the typical way from planet to planet, it would then (very) vaguely resemble a brachistochrone trajectory where you spend the first half speeding up and the second half slowing down again.
Logged

TJJ

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1905
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #17 on: April 22, 2017, 09:30:53 AM »

SB definately widens ship choice

Definitely true, and a big plus in my eyes.

Perhaps burn speed (as a stat) should be done away with entirely.
Instead, the faster you go, the less fuel efficient your engines. (Like the old 4x game "Stars!")

It'd take some careful balancing of AI fleet behaviour though, such that they don't go punishingly quickly too often.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2017, 09:32:33 AM by TJJ »
Logged

Embolism

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #18 on: April 22, 2017, 09:48:40 AM »

In some ways S-Burn also narrows ship choice. The Falcon, Conquest and Odyssey were meant to be more viable by having extra Burn, but that's kind of gone down the drain.

IMO, ships shouldn't have less Burn than their class without very good reason (i.e. stronger than normal: being Civilian is not a good reason), but otherwise Burn level differences should remain.

As it is, if poor-Burn vessels is why you like S-Burn then you probably wouldn't like it if it was made a lot more situational, e.g. only useful for long-distance, fixed-point travel and completely unusable for chasing/fleeing from enemy fleets. And it does need to be made situational because as it is you may as well make it baseline for the player with how it's being used.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2017, 09:52:40 AM by Embolism »
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #19 on: April 22, 2017, 10:08:29 AM »

Falcon is okay regardless of burn.  It is useful as a Medusa-like ship that can kite with Mauler, HVD, and beams.  SB should not hurt it.

Odyssey is hurt mostly by lack of fighter bays.  With only one, a battleship can just slap on a hangar hullmod and use non-bombers with only a -25% penalty and pretend to be an Odyssey with more guns, armor, and OP.  Now if Odyssey gets two, or even three bays, at least there will be a point to it.  Astral is the king of carriers with its new system.

I will admit that Conquest is probably hurt.  Onslaught is still worth 40 DP (same as Conquest and less than Odyssey), though I am not sure if Onslaught remains top dog given gameplay changes.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #20 on: April 22, 2017, 10:30:08 AM »

I will admit that Conquest is probably hurt.  Onslaught is still worth 40 DP (same as Conquest and less than Odyssey), though I am not sure if Onslaught remains top dog given gameplay changes.

I am beginning to think that fuel consumption may matter more than supply cost now. Base consumption progresses  as 1-2-3-10 with ship size. Any Capital is an incredible fuel hog, but Onslaught with 15 is doubly so.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #21 on: April 22, 2017, 10:40:11 AM »

That was the case too in 0.71-0.72.  Capitals are horribly expensive.  They were only worth it if they could solo more than a hundred ships singlehandedly.  It was cheaper to kill huge fleets with one battleship than with a dozen or so ships led by fully tweaked-out Dominator.

Similarly with Atlas.  But it held much more than destroyer-sized freighters, and fleet slots were at a premium.  Today, we have that new Colossus heavy freighter.  Almost half an Atlas there in terms of capacity.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2017, 10:42:01 AM by Megas »
Logged

Vind

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 784
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #22 on: April 22, 2017, 10:50:55 AM »

It is OP because you dont need time to stop and can immediately change direction. This skill need some slow down time from 20+ burn to usual 10 after it is deactivated.
Logged

Deshara

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1578
  • Suggestion Writer
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #23 on: April 22, 2017, 10:53:45 AM »

Sburn is op cause the AI needs an upgrade. If you're sburning at a smaller fleet they can see you, and see you're chasing them. They should react to that, even if it's just to Matador you at the last second and hit their sburn as you pass by & flee in the opposite direction, smashing that eburn button if you drop sburn to turn hard. Sburn doesn't need to be downgraded
Logged
Quote from: Deshara
I cant be blamed for what I said 5 minutes ago. I was a different person back then

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #24 on: April 22, 2017, 12:29:39 PM »

You shouldn't be able to interact with fleets/planets/stations while s-burning. It seems odd that you are going along at 20 burn yet you can still salvage a derelict if you pass over it. This along with making acceleration take longer would make it more balanced imo.
Logged

Dragon239

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #25 on: April 22, 2017, 12:45:00 PM »

It's odd how different my experience seems to be than everybody elses'. Everybody seems to be clamoring for S-Burn nerfs, and I think nerfing it as-is could very likely make for a more boring game.
Note: This post got a bit more rambly than expected, and I'm not overly experienced at the game. Plus I alt-tabbed out of a fight and want to get back to that. Forgive me if my thoughts jump all over, or I state something wrong.

I like S-Burn right now. I don't feel like the sector is "small" or any such thing - there are dozens upon dozens of systems in default-options sector (each one that you can explore - you don't *have* to fly in a single direction for 90 days for a thing to have "more space") and I still sometimes sit and stare at my screen on S-Burn while holding shift to get around. If something feels small it's because there are only 2 dozen or so inhabited systems by a few factions that don't try to expand. I most definitely don't want to have to alt-tab because of huge travel times or sit and stare at my screen as I hold shift for long periods of time. That isn't content I find fun, or immersion-improving, or whatever else. S-Burn majorly helps avoid such situations.

I also use E-burn sometimes. A lot? No, but I don't feel like I'm supposed to constantly use it. S-Burn destroys my maneuverability while in, stops my fleet to activate, and slows my acceleration - sometimes I need to e-burn away or in a different direction really fast to escape somebody. I sure am not instantly turning around and S-burning in the opposite direction without huge risk of them e-burning into me before I can actually build up the speed to escape.

Honestly, I shift it on/off a fair amount because of how much it decreases my turning ability. And when I do that when enemies are near, I'm also thinking if I'll be able to build speed back up before they e-burn into me.

Embolism suggested making shift speed up time more - this is a possibility I can support, if S-Burn is "nerfed." I'm still hesitant to say so though - warnings can make it safer, but they also make traveling more irritating (suddenly stopping time) or if you disable them, much more dangerous as it reduces your time to react. Then you're choosing between "irritating unexpected tops" or "extremely dangerous to reduce the time you spend waiting as a player." I don't think either of those are very great.

On "Burn" as a stat - I think it still has a purpose. It's primarily made "meh" (if it indeed is) because of how speed bands interact, and how the AI is limited.
1) The "Speed bands" of ships are about about 8-10 (Normal), 13-15 (E-Burn), and 18-20 (S-Burn).
2) The AI doesn't have access to the third band, as it cannot S-Burn.
3) The Third band is the fastest band, and even the slowest speed of it is decently faster than the highest of the 2nd band.
4) Burn speeds are capped at 20.
This means that if your entire fleet is 8-burn you can still escape a "fast" AI fleet, so it doesn't even matter that your ships are innately slower. Then with the 20-burn cap, the 11-Burn of Falcons and whatnot ends up being *mostly* useless - either you hit the 20-cap, or the extra benefit it provides is already unnecessary. It does help when you're in an E-Burn "chase" since it puts you above the AI, but those are not overly common.
Logged

Deshara

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1578
  • Suggestion Writer
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #26 on: April 22, 2017, 12:54:50 PM »

You shouldn't be able to interact with fleets/planets/stations while s-burning. It seems odd that you are going along at 20 burn yet you can still salvage a derelict if you pass over it. This along with making acceleration take longer would make it more balanced imo.
This was fixed in the newest hotfix
Logged
Quote from: Deshara
I cant be blamed for what I said 5 minutes ago. I was a different person back then

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #27 on: April 22, 2017, 12:59:24 PM »

Biggest problem with slow ships: getting anywhere takes ages.
Biggest advantage of sustained burn: getting anywhere is superfast, no matter what's your fleet composition.
Honestly, I think it wouldn't be a big nerf if your fleet wasn't very manoeuvrable or if it had to slow down to manoeuvre, you still would get everywhere quite fast.

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #28 on: April 22, 2017, 01:10:10 PM »

I think the idea behind S-Burn is great, but I agree it is a bit too 'always on' usable at the moment. I do however turn it off whenever I'm going through deep hyperspace - I need better turning to dodge storms.

Suggestion: Just lower the maneuverability by another 30%, increase the stopped time, and it should be good.
Logged

Deshara

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1578
  • Suggestion Writer
    • View Profile
Re: S-burn balance....
« Reply #29 on: April 22, 2017, 01:22:01 PM »

I think if you're finding yourself using it forever you may be having yourself a boring overworld game, I have to turn mine off to dodge kill-fleets on the reg
Logged
Quote from: Deshara
I cant be blamed for what I said 5 minutes ago. I was a different person back then
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6