Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tei]

As much as I love ships with heavy armor and disproportionate amount of guns on it, the Dominator and Onslaught seems to be extremely reluctant in using their burn drives.

They both seem to be something that should be on the front lines trading blows but every single battle with those ships they almost never use their Burn Drives to actually get there and fight. Even if I deploy them first and faster ships second, they always end up at the back of the fleet eventually.

And when the battle really starts to get going because they are lagging behind so much, most of the brunt of the fighting is done by everything EXCEPT the Dominators and Onslaughts. More than once I had half my fleet dying to a more flexible hostile armada before the big guns even arrive.

Note, I'm saying this when not in player hands. Is this just a case of computer controlled cowardice? Is there a number somewhere I can tweak to allow for more aggressibe Burn Drive usage?

[Dark.Revenant]

Aggressive burn drives leads to suicidal ships.

[Wyvern]

Aggressive burn drives leads to suicidal ships.

Once combat starts, yes.  But I think the point was that these ships should be willing to use Burn Drive to get -to- combat, or to the nav points they've been assigned to.

[Tei]

Aggressive burn drives leads to suicidal ships.

Once combat starts, yes.  But I think the point was that these ships should be willing to use Burn Drive to get -to- combat, or to the nav points they've been assigned to.

Basically this, the only times I've ever see it used is if there is no other ship remotely close by.

And an aggressive Onslaught with a captain jamming his foot on the gas pedal isnt that bad considering armor hullmods and officer abilities. I rather have the ship taking a beating and throwing some fire back as opposed to being practically dead weight in the rear of the fleet.

This happens with NPC fleets too, otfen an enemy Onslaught shows up at the end of a fight like some beefy boss ship but really it just gets ganked by my fleet because its escorts are all dead since it wasnt there when the most of the fighting took place.

[intrinsic_parity]

If you want a ship to behave very aggressively, put an aggressive officer in it. That seems to work well for me, I often put aggressive officers in onslaughts/dominators so that they tank more for other ships.

[Linnis]

Two things I do to play around this problem.
1. Disable combat objectives.
2. Deploy slow ships first, then the faster ones a few seconds later.

Battles are much faster and not alot chasing stuff around.

[Philder]

I can't speak for grabbing objectives or getting to the battles, but in battles it's very difficult to manage highly dynamic contextual situations. As others have said, careless Burn Driving into the enemy just causes the AI to suicide. Burn Drive just has too long a duration. Not only does it boost the ship forward substantially, the situation also has a lot of time to change. Add in the fact that LowTech ships have the worst speeds and maneuvreability, and you've got a ship system that can very very rarely be used safely.

Another thing to consider is that while it is possible to design the AI to be contextually aware enough to use Burn Drive, you also have to consider the problem of whether you should. To do so, you need to give the AI instantaneous and much greater awareness than a human player can typically manage. Making the AI 'smarter' than the player is a tough decision to make. A well equiped LowTech ship with low flux, Burn Driving at the player in the perfect situation could result in certain, unavoidable death. Do you want to add that kind of critical danger so easily in the game?

It's a balance. You have to remember that if you want YOUR AI ships to be smarter and more effective, you're also making the ENEMY AI smarter and more effective. And from what I hear from the vocal majority is that they don't Starsector to be that difficult or punishing of a game.

AI is a sword that swings both ways.

[xenoargh]

There are two solutions to those problems:

1.  Make Burn Drive a toggle.  Had it that way in Vacuum; no shields but you could drive around really fast.  But I’d want it just in a straight line, with a long cooldown.  That might work; fewer AI hassles.

2.  Make it really fast, so it’s not suicide. Might also work, and again, fewer AI hassles.

[TaLaR]

1.  Make Burn Drive a toggle.  Had it that way in Vacuum; no shields but you could drive around really fast.  But I’d want it just in a straight line, with a long cooldown.  That might work; fewer AI hassles.

Maybe. Enforcer (weakest DE in 1v1, vulnerable to Cruisers due to speed), Dominator (vulnerable to Capitals due to speed) and Onslaught (it's not as impressive as it once was due to losing large turret overlap, yet it's prime opponent is up-ranged Paragon) could use a buff.

[Philder]

I disagree with those two solutions. (1) just completely bypasses LowTechs slow speeds. At that point you might aswell just increase base speed and remove Burn Drive. (2) really doesn't solve much. It's still suicide if it ends up in the middle of the enemy fleet, away from allies, and too slow to flee bad to safety. If anything, substantially decreasing the duration of Burn Drive would be more effective, reducing its ability to put itself into suicidal situations.

Also, all LowTech is vulnerable to everything else due to slow speeds . That's kind of a balance necessity, what with its gratuitous amount of longer ranged and more flux efficiency weapons.

[xenoargh]

I think you missed the part about the cooldown 

That would give the AI the ability to stop before it gets into a mess, but not let it use it as often.  I don't mind the idea of Low Tech racing into a fight on Burn Drive, then having to stay really slow for most of the fight.

[Philder]

Sorry, I was exagerating sarcastically but forgot tone doesn't translate into text.

What I meant to say was that giving LowTech a very useful and controllable ability to chase, even limited by a cooldown, will [periodically] eliminate the advantage that Mid/HighTech has in the way of speed and maneuvreability. They survive by having the mobility to disengage when they choose. Not being able to disengage will be the difference between having a competitive edge and losing outright.

Burn Drive's current use of being able to catch up to the battle, at least, is great. It removes the problem of LowTech forever being out of range of the battle, but doesn't remove their mid-battle mobility penalty. The mobility penalty is there for a reason.

Contrary to my previous statements about Onslaught/Dominator being trash, I've since figured out some workable outfittings for Onslaught AI, at least, and effective outfits and flying strategies for pilotting both. I very much agree with the mobility penalty, otherwise they would be potentially too unbalanced. Actually, thinking on it further, I'd rescind my previous opinion that Burn Drive should have its duration significantly reduced. It's actually in a pretty good position. It allows faster ships to disengage from LowTech without being in danger of being immediately re-engaged, as Burn Drive would punish LowTech severely if it charged into the enemy fleet, or at the very least, it will ineffectively charge past its target.

IMO it would be terribly unbalanced to give a ship with that many slots for HMGs, LDMGs, and Annihilators/Torpedoes (not to mention whatever you put in the large slots) facing in the same direction a mid-battle mobility advantage. It's already dangerous enough as it is in the hands of a skilled player.

[Megas]

There is always bringing back burn drive vent-cancelling.  That plus pre-0.8 skills made Dominator the most powerful cruiser in the game, and Onslaught the most powerful capital in the game, at least as a playership.  AI usually could not vent-cancel, so that would not help AI.

[Linnis]

All ships should come with an infinite duration toggle-able burn drive.

In combat i mean. *Wink*