Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95a is out! (03/26/21)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7

Author Topic: Hammerhead Balance Theories  (Read 4193 times)

Igncom1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1144
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #15 on: January 16, 2020, 04:53:32 AM »

This AAF is really off topic by the way, even if kinda interesting. (Are all weapons OP with AAF? Are all ships with AAF OP? Or is a limited set of circumstances that make the Hammerhead powerful?)

But on the actual topic I've not really seen much of an issue with the Falcon (P) beyond it's unusual built in systems that probably don't need to be there. Otherwise why don't pirates put built in mods into all their ships like that? At least the luddites go full safety override with their craft, with the downsides of doing so being evident. (I've rarely used SO because it always seemed like a bad idea of prolonged fights and ranged fights, never got why people seem to love it.)
Logged
Sunders are the best ship in the game.

Lucky33

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #16 on: January 16, 2020, 06:02:15 AM »

Arguing that AAF is the equivalent of having twice the number of ballistic weapons is sorta fine... Except that it only gets that for effectively half the time in combat. Less than, in fact: The system has about 6 seconds of active duration and a 10 second cooldown. So (since you want to bring math into this) if you're spamming AAF off cooldown, a Hammerhead has double guns for two fifths of its active combat time. Or, on average 1.4x guns.

One last thing @Lucky33: The Hammerhead isn't the only ship with Accelerated Ammo Feeder as its system. Given your opinion of it so far, what are your thoughts on other ships with AAF?

You are assuming that every ship is firing for the unlimited period of time. To destroy another Hammerhead you need only from 4 to 5.5 seconds depending on how good the ai will manage to vent in the process. And thats without even single flux point spent on firing back. And no sabots. With them and more typical overload scenario you need only 3 seconds. And all that means that you need a much heavier ship to take all 6 seconds of AAF damage in the first place.

Atlas mk2 is OK or something like that. It has its flux stat reduced to the level of Falcon. Everything else is closer to Hammerhead.
Logged

Lucky33

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #17 on: January 16, 2020, 06:21:04 AM »

I meant the phase skimmer, sorry.
AAF sucked with limited ammo, too. Ballistics were limited by ammo and flux, more so by the latter. It wasn't until it got a discount on flux that it was useful.
AAF doesn't break any rules, because there are no rules saying that a ship system can't be strong, only that ships can't be overly strong. You have a valid point (that a Hammerhead might be too strong), but you are derailing it with an unnecessary claim (that a ship system "cheats", by allowing the ship to do things it normally cannot, which is completely in line with every single ship system in the game).

"Phase skimmer": Wolf and Medusa pay for extra mobility. Remnants dont. While they are unavailable for the player I dont really care.

Sucked = was balanced.

Creating damage out of thin air is a cheating. Even extra mobility is a less of a problem. But damage kills. Sorry for being too obvious but you clearly need to make your priorities straight.
Logged

Plantissue

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #18 on: January 16, 2020, 07:53:43 AM »

Sometimes I feel like you guys are playing a different game. SO hammerhead performs badly in real battles when it faces fighters and ships that are bigger than destroyers. Hammerhead is fine now that it is 10 DP as opposed to 8 DP. It still have problems hitting frigates sometimes due to its fixed mounts. It's no longer an overwhelmingly better DP spend compared to other destroyer hulls. No it's not like a heavy cruiser. The weakest cruisers are Falcon and Venture (which isn't even a combat ship) and both can deal with the Hammerhead well enough. Assault Chaingun will only ever be seen in SO builds.

Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1440
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #19 on: January 16, 2020, 08:17:39 AM »

If I'm not mistaken AC before had 300 DPS, then Alex buffed it by 100% to what we know today. Maybe a middle ground of 450 DPS would not be broken?

It had 400 DPS at 1 flux/dmg  Where it was fine (but niche). I used them before the buff even on non-SO builds. Now it has 600 dps at .66 flux/dmg
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1905
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #20 on: January 16, 2020, 08:54:30 AM »

I think a big part of the problem with the AC buff was that it was done by increasing damage per shot meaning it got a lot better at armor penetration as well as a DPS boost. The old version was underpowered IMO because it had such poor armor penetration, in fact there was a whole thread a while ago about armor mechanics where we showed that AC performed the same as heavy mauler against mid level armor while costing twice as much flux. If it got nerfed back to 400 or 450 DPS by reducing ROF rather than shot damage, it might be in a better place.

The hammerhead is weaker than other destroyers in that it has less mounts, bad arcs, and limited mobility. Also it has pretty middle of the road stats in a lot of other areas. It gets a damage boost to compensate for those weaknesses. The amount of extra damage it needs to compensate is certainly up for debate, but there's nothing fundamentally wrong with giving a ship a special system to compensate for other weaknesses. 
« Last Edit: January 16, 2020, 09:27:52 AM by intrinsic_parity »
Logged

Lucky33

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #21 on: January 16, 2020, 09:37:48 AM »

I think a big part of the problem with the AC buff

What problem? Care to describe?

The hammerhead is weaker than other destroyers in that it has less mounts, bad arcs, and limited mobility. Also it has pretty middle of the road stats in a lot of other areas. It gets a damage boost to compensate for those weaknesses.

Please, design a variant for a gun-destroyer of 10 DP or less which I wouldnt be able to beat in the Hammerhead, 10 out of 10 and without AAF usage.
Logged

DatonKallandor

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 669
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #22 on: January 16, 2020, 10:12:11 AM »

Cool it with the "1v1 me bro". 1v1 fights don't matter for balance, and if there's player control in the mix it doesn't matter times a million. Starsector is ultimately a fleet combat game - 1v1s happen rarely outside of the simulator.
Logged

Lucky33

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #23 on: January 16, 2020, 10:22:02 AM »

B-b-but Hammerhead is so weak!? Why is it so difficult to illustrate its weaknes in this simple manner?
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2342
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #24 on: January 16, 2020, 10:51:13 AM »

"Phase skimmer": Wolf and Medusa pay for extra mobility.
In what way? Phase skimmer doesn't cost you any flux at all. While AAF can kill, phase skimmer can save. Plasma jets and plasma burn can allow you to destroy a vulnerable ship, before its allies can retaliate. Fortress Shield and Damper Field can let you survive what should have kill you. All of these let ships do things they wouldn't be able to otherwise. That is the express purpose of ship systems, to let ships do things they can't otherwise. It's impossible to break, abuse or circumvent the rules, if there are no rules, so it's impossible to cheat in this regard. Well, not exactly. Ship systems have no rules, but ships themselves do. They have to pick between defence and offence, they can't attack you without you being able to fight back somehow, stuff like that. There are ships like that in the game, but Hammerhead isn't one of them.

Again, Hammerhead being too strong for its cost is something that can be argued for and that some people will agree with. The insane claim that AAF breaks rules that don't exist doesn't help you convey this point across.

Sucked = was balanced.
Hammerhead was actually harmed by that version of AAF. The enemy could flicker the shield, dodge it, tank it on the shield or be too small to be hit with all the projectiles, whereas Hammerhead had to pay full price in flux for all these shots. It was better not to ever use it, unless you already won, or else the enemy would capitalise on you getting fluxed out. It wasn't fun, it had no utility and it couldn't even do what it was supposed to do (increase the ship's offensive capability). Does this sound desirable to you?
You could theoretically plan for this, by making Hammerhead undergunned, but that would make it only half the ship it's supposed to be every other time. Or you could fire only a few of your guns while using AAF, but good luck making AI do that.

Lucky33

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #25 on: January 16, 2020, 11:12:35 AM »

In what way?

In DP way.

While AAF can kill, phase skimmer can save.

Thats "wining" against "not losing".

That is the express purpose of ship systems, to let ships do things they can't otherwise.

Use the console.

It's impossible to break, abuse or circumvent the rules, if there are no rules

There are rules. Otherwise there would be only random symbols in the stats.

Again, Hammerhead being too strong for its cost is something that can be argued for and that some people will agree with.
The insane claim that AAF breaks rules that don't exist doesn't help you convey this point across.

You only produced some name calling so far. If you think that I'm impressed and at a loss for words then think again.

Hammerhead was actually harmed by that version of AAF. The enemy could flicker the shield, dodge it, tank it on the shield or be too small to be hit with all the projectiles, whereas Hammerhead had to pay full price in flux for all these shots. It was better not to ever use it, unless you already won, or else the enemy would capitalise on you getting fluxed out. It wasn't fun, it had no utility and it couldn't even do what it was supposed to do (increase the ship's offensive capability). Does this sound desirable to you?

Yes.

You could theoretically plan for this, by making Hammerhead undergunned, but that would make it only half the ship it's supposed to be every other time. Or you could fire only a few of your guns while using AAF, but good luck making AI do that.

Or you could unmount the AAF once and for all. Problem solved. Everyone's happy.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1440
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #26 on: January 16, 2020, 12:20:28 PM »

B-b-but Hammerhead is so weak!? Why is it so difficult to illustrate its weaknes in this simple manner?

Because illustrating its weakness by looking at its greatest strength seems counterproductive. And the hammerhead isnt weak it just isnt OP.
Logged

Lucky33

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #27 on: January 16, 2020, 01:00:16 PM »

B-b-but Hammerhead is so weak!? Why is it so difficult to illustrate its weaknes in this simple manner?

Because illustrating its weakness by looking at its greatest strength seems counterproductive. And the hammerhead isnt weak it just isnt OP.

I'm not looking at its greatest strength. I'm looking at the lack of any substantial proof that Hammerhead is weak without AAF.
Logged

Cyber Von Cyberus

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 197
  • Warcrimes are very profitable...
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #28 on: January 16, 2020, 01:18:49 PM »

While AAF can kill, phase skimmer can save.

Thats "wining" against "not losing".

Antonyms of losing:
(of a game or contest) Opposite of present participle for to fail to win:

winning

“He would win against his opponent, a fitting finale to the hard work and training he had put in over the last few months.”




Anyways, how exactly do you think that removing the AAF from Hammerhead will make it more balanced, Lucky ? It's already pretty weak in terms of firepower considering that both of it's mediums are front facing instead of being turrets, its mobility is average, shields average, not very survivable against anything larger than it that can out-range it or can keep aiming at it. The only time I've seen the AAF be a threat was when I was nearly overloaded and couldn't run away from the Hammerhead. In comparison, a Medusa's teleportation or a Wolf's phase skimmer allows me to directly jump into the enemy's blind-spot and shoot them from behind while they can't hit me.
Logged
Diktat Admiral:"What do we have here ? A dissident ? A pirate ? Or maybe a degenerate ?"

Me:"Yes, I'm all of those."

MrDaddyPants

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Hammerhead Balance Theories
« Reply #29 on: January 16, 2020, 01:51:06 PM »

I think a big part of the problem with the AC buff

What problem? Care to describe?

The hammerhead is weaker than other destroyers in that it has less mounts, bad arcs, and limited mobility. Also it has pretty middle of the road stats in a lot of other areas. It gets a damage boost to compensate for those weaknesses.

Please, design a variant for a gun-destroyer of 10 DP or less which I wouldnt be able to beat in the Hammerhead, 10 out of 10 and without AAF usage.

Well that's awkward since there are no other 10 dp destroyers in vanilla except condor? But i'd gladly indulge your overpowered hammerheads in a show match. I suggest 10 dp vs 10, and 50 dp vs 50dp. I'm sure we can even find a streamer. You bring hammerheads i bring other combination of vanilla ships in equal DP and we'll see how overpowered your hammerheads are.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7