Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9

Author Topic: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury  (Read 9243 times)

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1488
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #60 on: April 27, 2020, 11:35:26 PM »

IR pulse is pretty decent anti-fighter but its so much OP for that job when it doesn't do other things like rails (and other small kinetics) do
Logged

pairedeciseaux

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #61 on: April 28, 2020, 12:16:16 AM »

Looking at this ship more closely, it appears to have two empty small side mounts. I need to ask WHY Alex keeps making so many ships with these pretty much useless side mounts. Now both of the new ships have, and several of the new ships from the last batch of ships, have these nearly useless mounts...

Maybe I don't understand the complain here, but... IMO those are anything but useless.

The rear turrets presumably cover the sides as well, making the side turrets redundant. The wide omni shield on the Fury makes the side turrets even less useful since it can cover the front and sides at the same time.

On the Fury, by the look of it, I would put:
  • Burst Laser on rear small slots : quickly catches the death sentence Salamanders
  • IR Pulse Laser on side small slots : provides sustained fire against fighters / frigates / phase ships
  • LR PD Laser on front small slot(s) : anti missile PD, catches Sabots

And yeah, all those get a nice boost from the Integrated Targeting Unit hull mod (which IMO most cruisers should have) and Gunnery Implants skill (which most players/officers should have).

But of course it would really depend on the medium turrets arc. On an Aurora I don't feel the need to have IR Pulse Laser pointing to the side in order to shoot at fighters / frigates / phase ships because that is already covered by medium-size Pulse Laser turrets.

Options, I tell you, options.  :)

IR pulse is pretty decent anti-fighter but its so much OP for that job when it doesn't do other things like rails (and other small kinetics) do

IMO, IR Pulse Laser as an anti fighter gun is better compared to Light Assault Gun, which ...
  • has similar range
  • has the same OP cost
  • can and should be combined with (Dual) Light Machine Gun

In theory, on a high tech ship the player may use - say - two IR Pulse Laser on each side (Paragon, Odyssey), while on a low tech ship the player may use a LAG+DLMG combo on each side (Legion, Onslaught, Mora, Dominator). Same OP cost in this case. Though there are more options in ballistic land, LMG and Vulcan are decent enough.
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3195
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #62 on: April 28, 2020, 12:18:50 AM »

A larger Shrike coming in the next Starsector release is exiting news from my perspective! Although reading the forum it seems pretty obvious Shrike-type gameplay does not appeal to every player.   ;)
It's less the playstyle, more the capabilities of the ship itself. Though, arguably, as a light cruiser, it should be looked at as a big destroyer. I probably will still prefer Medusa for that, though right now I don't really have the choice to use Medusa, anyway.

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2571
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #63 on: April 28, 2020, 12:31:21 AM »

Player piloted Medusa is definitely better than a Fury as currently presented. Medusa has 2 small kinetic slots and skimmer to dodge Sabots, which should be easily enough to overwhelm whatever raw flux advantage Fury may hold (can't be better than Aurora, right?). Medusa also won't allow a Fury to disengage once it starts losing (higher base speed + skimmer vs PB which is useless for retreating under AI control).
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1340
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #64 on: April 28, 2020, 12:58:43 AM »

Ok it's true that you can get more out of Medusa when comparing DP costs, but don't forget that Fury will also be better in some cases. I suspect better logistical stats, it can get cruiser ITU which is super nice and it can be a deadly missile boat able to close in fast. Now all things considered, you can look at it as a poor man's Medusa, which would be fine if it wasn't 15 DP. I couldn't care less that it's gonna come in the general high tech blueprint package and be a common ship, it still has to be better than other destroyers. There are some great and useful ships in common packages. I think the point of ''light'' something is being better than everything smaller than it while having a similar cost but losing to most ships in its own category. Problem comes when there's Sunder, Hammerhead and Medusa all being more effective than Fury (again, when looking at DP).
EDIT: Honestly even when ignoring DP costs it won't be worth slowing down your whole fleet.
EDIT 2: Wait wait it's going to have burn 9 if it follows the same logic of other light ships.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2020, 01:09:03 AM by Grievous69 »
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Amoebka

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 515
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #65 on: April 28, 2020, 01:36:55 AM »

it can get cruiser ITU which is super nice
What are you going to boost with ITU, heavy blasters? It's not a Falcon which can mount heavy maulers / HVDs.
Logged

Igncom1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1230
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #66 on: April 28, 2020, 01:43:35 AM »

You can pointlessly boost gravatons and tac lasers!
Logged
Sunders are the best ship in the game.

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1488
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #67 on: April 28, 2020, 02:28:42 AM »

it can get cruiser ITU which is super nice
What are you going to boost with ITU, heavy blasters? It's not a Falcon which can mount heavy maulers / HVDs.

Yes. The extra 240 range on pulse/HB and 200 range on IR pulse is super useful. Do you not put ITU on non SO Aurora?
Logged

Hiruma Kai

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #68 on: April 28, 2020, 02:37:22 AM »

Just thinking about what the stats on the ship might look like, based on other, already existing ships (although presumably Alex's testing will tweak this with eye to some sort of ship effectiveness balance).

I'm guessing the Fury will have 115 OP.  60 from weapons, 55 for being a light cruiser, similar to the Falcon's 70+55=125.

Armor can't be more than a Falcon's, given mid-tech tends to more armor than high tech.  Aurora has 800 armor, Falcon has 750.  So at most 750, and potentially less, like 700 or 650.  Same goes for structure, with Aurora having 8000, and a Falcon having 6000.  So I'm betting structure is likely 6000.

Keeping with high tech doctrine, speed at a minimum is going to be 75 to match a Falcon, and likely won't be faster than a Shrike at 100.  My guess is base speed of 85, slightly faster than an Aurora's base speed.  Although the Falcon and Aurora's superior movement special abilities still will make them faster overall (or at least backwards).

To make it competitive with energy weapon/high tech doctrine, means it needs a larger flux pool than the Falcon, and larger base dissipation.  The Falcon can fall back on ballistic efficiency/range with at least 50% of its heavier weapons, while the Fury is going to be paying the usual flux tax on its purely energy/missile weapon loadout.  Shrike already has 350 base dissipation and a 105 cost shield, for 245 net base flux dissipation.  Medusa at 12 DP has 400 base dissipation and 120 cost shield for 280 net.  Falcon with has 350 base dissipation and 140 cost shield for 210 net.

If we spend OP on vents, stabilized shields and flux distributor, the shrike clocks in at 610 dissipation and 52 cost shield, for 558 net.  Medusa comes in at 600 net.  Falcon comes in with 740-70=670 net dissipation, only 20% higher than the Shrike, for nearly twice the DP.  Given this ship is the Shrike's big brother, it needs more flux than a Falcon to fill the Shrike's big brother role.  The other extreme is the 30 DP Aurora, which clocks in at 1190-200=990 net dissipation (about 77% more than a Shrike), putting a cap from the other end.

My guess is it'll end up around 40% higher than the shrike, or around 780 after those 2 mods and max vents.  So likely ~200 shield cost base (100 with stabilized shield), and 500 base dissipation, not too far off from an Eagles dissipation.  My reasoning is a Falcon is 1.5 times a Hammerhead in terms of DP, while the net max vent flux is only about 20% more.  So for a Fury which is close to twice the DP cost of a Shrike, and sharing the same mission profile, I'd guess 40% more.

Which means 1 heavy blaster can be fit in terms of flux dissipation very comfortably, while 2 is a bad idea unless you're running safety overrides.   Two pulse lasers should be fine flux wise.

Flux capacity would probably be between 8000 and 9000 base.  Shield efficiency probably of 0.7 or 0.8.

I feel like if its flux stats don't meet that kind of minimum, its not going to stand up as worthwhile alternative to a Falcon, Pirate Falcon, or even 2 Shrikes.

The thing I don't like about the double medium missile and single medium energy weapon loadout of this ship, is the Pirate Falcon is just going to make you ask, under which situations do you take this instead of a Pirate Falcon?  The Pirate Falcon doesn't even need the extra 2 small energy mounts to have the extra 10 OP for its 125 OP.  It has ballistic damage efficiency if you want it, can double down on medium missiles, plus free hull mods.  Unless this is bringing something to the table the Pirate Falcon isn't in that configuration?
Logged

Igncom1

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1230
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #69 on: April 28, 2020, 02:49:11 AM »

The problem with the pirate Falcon is that it is arguably better then the regular Falcon.
Logged
Sunders are the best ship in the game.

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1340
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #70 on: April 28, 2020, 03:02:17 AM »

@Hiruma Kai
The only thing I'll note is that the Falcon doesn't care as much as high tech ships about shield upkeep. It can kite all day long while high tech needs to go in and is forced to use its shields on approach. So if someone is confused by its low net dissipation just don't forget how it plays out in battles.

And yeah I already mentioned Falcon(P) is better in every single way while having the same cost. (I think it even has burn 11 but I'm not sure now)

So in the end I think you pretty much came close to the actual Fury stats, it seems logical. If the flux stats were any lower than that then honestly it's gonna be a sad little ship.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Amoebka

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 515
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #71 on: April 28, 2020, 03:28:50 AM »

Yes. The extra 240 range on pulse/HB and 200 range on IR pulse is super useful. Do you not put ITU on non SO Aurora?

Your cruiser with ITU blasters still has less range than a ballistic destroyer without ITU. And no, I don't use ITU on Aurora. Range is less precious when you can control the distance with your superior speed.
Logged

DatonKallandor

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #72 on: April 28, 2020, 05:10:13 AM »

The thing I don't like about the double medium missile and single medium energy weapon loadout of this ship, is the Pirate Falcon is just going to make you ask, under which situations do you take this instead of a Pirate Falcon?  The Pirate Falcon doesn't even need the extra 2 small energy mounts to have the extra 10 OP for its 125 OP.  It has ballistic damage efficiency if you want it, can double down on medium missiles, plus free hull mods.  Unless this is bringing something to the table the Pirate Falcon isn't in that configuration?

The Pirate Falcon has two story-point hullmods built in. If you compare it to something, give that ship 2 free hullmods too. (Pirate Falcon will still probably come out ahead - it's that good)

On the matter of empty slots, frankly there should probably be a 0 OP gun for every slot type (or at least smalls) just so you don't have to run with completely empty slots. Mining Lasers are probably bad enough to be the energy 0 OP weapon.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1340
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #73 on: April 28, 2020, 05:35:34 AM »

That's ridiculous, free weapons don't make sense as you're not giving up on anything, absolutely no downsides. For example a 0 OP hullmod could work if it also has a negative aspect. You would always put 0 OP weapons in smalls, even if they're complete ***. There is no choice, so I'd rather see something like Mining laser be buffed and stay in 1-2 OP range.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Harmful Mechanic

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1330
  • Ur-Quan Bastard
    • View Profile
Re: The new high tech light cruiser - Fury
« Reply #74 on: April 28, 2020, 05:52:20 AM »

With slot covers, there's relatively little reason for 0 OP weapons to exist (setting aside that, like fighters at 0 OP, the scaling problem makes them a bad idea), at least in the base game. Mods, on the other hand, could plausibly implement something useless with interesting scripting that solves the scaling issue.

I'd like to see non-weapon small energy slot options for 1-2 OP, things like missile jammers and targeting lasers with scripted effects. Small energies are already more of a support-weapon type of mount, so it would offer some new and interesting options.
Logged
People need societies, but they don't necessarily need nations.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9