Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Isn't Military Subsystems a bit too much of a no-brainer?  (Read 2878 times)

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Isn't Military Subsystems a bit too much of a no-brainer?
« on: November 25, 2018, 08:43:09 PM »

It completely removes strategic civilian strategic penalties (-1 speed compared to average for size and x2 sensor profile) for quite cheap.
The only negative is that it competes with other logistic hullmods (or in case of Tug for spot of the only hullmod).

So if even in their base state civilian ships do not slow down your fleet and you do not care about sensor profile/have larger ships as your top 5 you can afford Efficiency Overhaul + relevant capacity increase (cargo/fuel/crew depending on logistic vessel type). But that's kind of minor 'win more' scenario.
Logged

nomadic_leader

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 725
    • View Profile
Re: Isn't Military Subsystems a bit too much of a no-brainer?
« Reply #1 on: November 26, 2018, 01:17:34 AM »

However, it's a significant amount of OP isn't it? And doubling crew requirements can be quite a significant cost if you're running a fleet focused on exploration/salvage. It's not like you can really use any of those ships for combat, since you've spent so many OP already just to get MS. Maybe it should just be renamed.

I really like it generally,  since it opens up new play-styles like stealth/sneak for civilian ships to become more self reliant if you're willing to totally avoid combat. Isn't that a good thing?
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1896
    • View Profile
Re: Isn't Military Subsystems a bit too much of a no-brainer?
« Reply #2 on: November 26, 2018, 01:18:31 AM »

It completely removes strategic civilian strategic penalties (-1 speed compared to average for size and x2 sensor profile) for quite cheap.
The only negative is that it competes with other logistic hullmods (or in case of Tug for spot of the only hullmod).

So if even in their base state civilian ships do not slow down your fleet and you do not care about sensor profile/have larger ships as your top 5 you can afford Efficiency Overhaul + relevant capacity increase (cargo/fuel/crew depending on logistic vessel type). But that's kind of minor 'win more' scenario.

Only if your civilian ships are the larger/slowest in your fleet and you care about sensor profile. If they are not one of the five largest the sensor penalty is pointless as is if they are not the slowest.

If they’re the largest but not slower than all your other combat ships then IEA dominates MSS. As it provides the sensor reduction with no penalty and the speed is pointless. Since most civilian ships are destroyer or cruiser size this is fairly common from mid game on
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Isn't Military Subsystems a bit too much of a no-brainer?
« Reply #3 on: November 26, 2018, 01:24:17 AM »

However, it's a significant amount of OP isn't it? And doubling crew requirements can be quite a significant cost if you're running a fleet focused on exploration/salvage. It's not like you can really use any of those ships for combat, since you've spent so many OP already just to get MS. Maybe it should just be renamed.

Not really, it's 5/10/15/25 OP. Only Tug (which has 5 OP total) has problems with cost. And true civilian ships are mostly-useless in combat anyway (well, they can use converted hangars). Reducing their in-combat strength a bit, to significantly reduce chances of having to deploy them is very much acceptable.

Crew requirements for civilians are low enough that doubling them doesn't hurt (overwhelming majority of your fleet's crew requirement will come from carriers anyway).

Only if your civilian ships are the larger/slowest in your fleet and you care about sensor profile. If they are not one of the five largest the sensor penalty is pointless as is if they are not the slowest.

If they’re the largest but not slower than all your other combat ships then IEA dominates MSS. As it provides the sensor reduction with no penalty and the speed is pointless. Since most civilian ships are destroyer or cruiser size this is fairly common from mid game on

That's a valid use case for IEA, sure. But I'd still say that MSS is way too obvious solution to civilian problems in cases where you have no slow military ships.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2018, 01:31:31 AM by TaLaR »
Logged

Schwartz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1453
    • View Profile
Re: Isn't Military Subsystems a bit too much of a no-brainer?
« Reply #4 on: November 26, 2018, 01:55:03 AM »

It's good but not overpowered. 2 other logistics hullmods contest its spot: Efficiency Overhaul and Surveying Equipment. If you want a well-rounded fleet that can survey planets cheaply, you'll stick SE on your cargo and fuel ships too.

I mostly use EO & SE because I don't care about a bit of sensor profile. I do care to minimize fuel on extended trips.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Isn't Military Subsystems a bit too much of a no-brainer?
« Reply #5 on: November 26, 2018, 02:13:07 AM »

EO is very nice to have and stick it even on secondary military ships. But it's nice to have vs necessary for survival (when civilian ships slow you down and increase your fleet sensor profile, while you are not yet ready to handle arbitrarily large amounts of pirates).

Surveying Equipment is not bad, but Shepherds get it for free, so why not just add more Shepherds. They are useful as cargo haulers and decent extra in combat. Though it's probably viable mid-late game only because I increased fleet size in settings to 60.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12150
    • View Profile
Re: Isn't Military Subsystems a bit too much of a no-brainer?
« Reply #6 on: November 26, 2018, 04:40:27 AM »

Military Subsystems is good in the early game.  Later in the game, not as useful as others like Efficiency Overhaul, Surveying Equipment, or Solar Shielding.

Shepherds are good (not just for built-in hullmods, but also for auto-resolving fights), but not always enough unless you bring about ten of them (which eats too much into fleet slots).  I have put Surveying Equipment on the Phaeton, Colossus, and occasionally few warships.
Logged

Serenitis

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1467
    • View Profile
Re: Isn't Military Subsystems a bit too much of a no-brainer?
« Reply #7 on: November 26, 2018, 10:57:30 AM »

Military Subsystems is a good mod, but not good enough to be used all the time.
The increase in crew requirement is a big enough downside for long-range operations, as such fleets are mostly civilian in nature and crew is the only real limiting factor in such adventures.

Efficiency Overhaul though, that goes on literally everything. Less crew needed = longer mission duration = more interesting things found.
Also, the increased recovery rate is very useful when fighting back-to-back battles. As tends to happen with base seiges, pirate raids and remnants.

Survey Equipment gets put on every civilian ship that can fit it. Transports, tankers, shuttles, mules, whatever. If it doesn't get deployed regularly then it gets SE so it contributes to my rapacious desire for all the planetary knowledge.

So no, Military Subsystems is not something I would consider a 'no brainer'.
But then again we are not the same, and do not have the same priorities.
Logged

nathanebht

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 93
    • View Profile
Re: Isn't Military Subsystems a bit too much of a no-brainer?
« Reply #8 on: November 26, 2018, 11:43:51 PM »

Haven't had to use Tugs in 0.9a and its because of Military Subsystems. So yes its too good. Needs to cost more points. I'd still use it. I remember hating Tugs in 0.8.  ;D
Logged