Print

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

[Dal]

SO is not the only fun gameplay style but it is distinct and one of the most fun ones. I'd say address the balance concerns by revisiting built-ins and the new skills than the functionality itself.

[Midnight Kitsune]

I do not feel that SO itself is the root of the problem, rather the issue is with how the built in hullmod system incentivizes always choosing the most expensive option.

Changing the "built in hullmod" system to work off a separate OP limit rather than a binary 2 or 3 hullmod limit would work much better I feel. That way the issue of always selecting the most expensive hullmod to save on OP is avoided, and makes it more viable to build in multiple cheap hullmods. Since you could build in 1 or 2 very expensive hullmods or many cheaper ones.  A simpler solution would just be to make more expensive hullmods take two built in slots, rather than one.

That just sounds like the old system of increasing OP, just with more complications, steps and limits.

[Low Settings]

I got it. Maybe make builing in safety overrides cost 2 story points with no bonus exp. If the ship explodes then boo hoo

[Euripides]

Hmm - correct me if I'm wrong, but I think *most* of the issue stems from SO being free. And if you think about it, there are some handy reasons for why permanently building SO into a hull could, perhaps, be a bit ill-advised...

All I can say is, SO cost too much before .95 for me to ever bother using except in meme-fleets. Now in my actual regular fleets in .95 I am using some ships (only frigates) with SO.
It simply costs too much OP for what it did prior to .95 and had (still has) massive additional downsides on top of the OP cost. It wasn't worth bothering with especially on any ship that already had tight fittings prior to .95

It just sounds like you're going to make it useless again. Which is too bad, this is the first time I felt the tradeoffs were actually worth it. Even if SO cost as little as 5 OP I think I'd be skipping it over since the downsides of the mod are so constraining and pigeonhole the role of the ship you put it on.

I almost wonder if it wouldn't be better to get rid of OP costs on hull mods and just have a hullmod cap instead.

[Üstad]

SO should give a bit more manouver but make it less safe as it suggests. Ships with SO should take %125 energy damage to shields and armor, %75 kinetic damage to armor instead of %50, and HE damage for shields should be %75 instead of %50.

[Ad Astra]

I think the lore friendly way of balancing in built SO is to give the player irresistible urges to pray 5 times a day, use capitals as battering rams against random space stations, turning half of your fleet into bomb ships (fill with fuel, lift shields, engage full thrusters, yeet in general direction of the enemy) and last but not least have nearby AI cores sound like incessant yodelling inside your head throwing you into mandatory luddic sermons in order to resist the maddening voice of technosatan.

[Anvel]

After playing with SO a bit I can certainly say that SO shouldn't be nerfed as a ship system, let it be as is(allowed to build in) into low tech ships, every "delicate machinery" ship shouldn't be allowed to even install it and other high-tech ship disallowed to build-in it and should pay 1.5x for it and midline disallowed to build-in but can install it for normal price. This will balance its usage a little.

[Amazigh]

After playing with SO a bit I can certainly say that SO shouldn't be nerfed as a ship system, let it be as is(allowed to build in) into low tech ships, every "delicate machinery" ship shouldn't be allowed to even install it and other high-tech ship disallowed to build-in it and should pay 1.5x for it and midline disallowed to build-in but can install it for normal price. This will balance its usage a little.

If Delicate Machinery / High Maintenance  prevented installation/building in of SO i think that'd be a good step, makes sense that these highly complex/delicate ships can't be safely overclocked.


I agree with the idea that SO might give too much of a flux bonus, but maybe instead of just reducing it from +100% to 50%/75% maybe change it to 50% and a flat bonus based on hull size, that would be set so that lowtech ships (with their naturally lower dissipation rates) would get a bigger bonus from this than hightech would.

A couple of other changes i think could work well, are changing how SO interacts with CR:
- Have SO increase the CR per deployment stat, by some amount. (double it?)
- With SO installed, have malfunction chance start earlier.


The issue of building in SO, is more (imo) an overarching issue with how built-in hullmods work, for example:
When looking at what hullmods to build in, i sort them by cost, and then look at what *expensive* hullmods would work with my build, and only regard what mods to pick based on OP cost.
eg: I wouldn't build-in a cheap mod (that is needed for my build), when i could build in an expensive mod that is not required, but would be nice to have.

[PeanutGalaxy]

The issue of building in SO, is more (imo) an overarching issue with how built-in hullmods work, for example:
When looking at what hullmods to build in, i sort them by cost, and then look at what *expensive* hullmods would work with my build, and only regard what mods to pick based on OP cost.
eg: I wouldn't build-in a cheap mod (that is needed for my build), when i could build in an expensive mod that is not required, but would be nice to have.

here is a thought then, maybe the issue isnt that safety override is too good of a mod to build in but that all the other options are bad. currently, as you said, the only consideration for picking mods to build in is the most expensive ones. perhaps mods could give some additional bonuses when built in, something akin to how skills can be made "elite" with story points. now instead of nerfing safety override or not allowing it to be built in it could instead be balanced around it NOT having some additional effect.