Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3 4

Author Topic: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does  (Read 9715 times)

Rauschkind

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 175
    • View Profile
augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« on: April 10, 2021, 07:48:22 PM »

so, is it me not getting something?
it adds max burn and thats nice - but: i just can add a few tugs. ok, fleet size has a limit, but its pretty easy to add 4 tuggs anyway.
the mod however is extremely expensive to the point where it becomes crippeling on military hulls.
on civilian hulls the op costs are not an issue but it conflicts with having both surveying and high res sensors (which is fine imo)

well. i imaigne this has discussed before, so i rather ask before i make a pointless suggestion.
Logged

KarakuriShogun

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 34
  • "They killed my Warden again!"
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2021, 07:55:34 PM »

I really like how it works, making those atlas get to burn 9 without tugs is really nice, and the expensive OP part for military ships is not so bad with the story hull mods now, so I feel its on a good spot, and as you say if you dont like spending story points you always have tugs, so everybody can be happy.
Logged

Fenrir

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 219
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2021, 07:57:47 PM »

it works totally fine to me, as I only install it on Atlas and Prometheus which I don't really use often. My fleet is current under base burn level 8 which is achieved having battlecruisers as the largest hull in fleet and using revenants as logistic ship (basically fancy its phase field to minimize sensor profile). In case I need larger ships like a real capital, I either add two tugs into the two backup fleet slot I left empty in case find any valuable hulls or replace the two phantoms in fleet as I am not likely going a ground operation.

Burn 8 is fine to me.
Logged
*cough* try tossing the PK into a black hole *cough*

Retry

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2021, 08:03:19 PM »

1.Oxen consume supplies like a Destroyer, burn fuel like Heavy Cruisers and come with massive sensor profiles well in excess of capital ships.  Like, truly massive.  A tug is 66% more visible to opposing fleets than a standard Cap, so 4 of them in one fleet is going to light up your fleet to other hostile fleets like a rave.  Even with insulated engines, Oxen still have nearly the sensor profile of a Capital ship.
2.One has to find tugs before one buys tugs.  In my current playthrough, I've explored ~85% of the Persean Sector, and I haven't found a single tug anywhere.
3.ADF can be built-in to a combat ship without impacting its combat performance, if desired.  Doing this also frees up 4 ship slots that'd be "burned" on maintaining Oxen, giving you a lot more combat ships or logistics ships.
Logged

Baqar79

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2021, 08:08:28 PM »

I started out my current game with my usual exploration start and tried to get a hold of as many Apogee's as possible due to how fuel efficient they are.  Ox tugs are very expensive to run both in fuel and maintenance while only boosting burn speed, but Apogee's give fantastic cargo/crew capacity, decent fuel capacity great defensive potential as well as High resolution sensors and salvaging equipment.  Integrating Augmented drives into an Apogee increases their maximum sustained burn speed from 16 to 20 making it easier to outrun real threats. 

On top of this by getting somewhere faster, you also cut down your supply usage as a side effect. 

I would actually love to use Ox tugs, but beside their heavy maintenance and fuel costs, their sensor profile is horrible and not ideal for keeping out of sight.  I think they should probably be buffed a bit; as I can't bring myself to use them in any game.
Logged

Embolism

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #5 on: April 10, 2021, 08:50:05 PM »

The only thing I have against ADF is that more often than not I just want one burn, not two (and as said, Oxen are expensive to field and light up your fleet like a Christmas tree), so it almost feels I'm wasting a bunch of OP for an extra burn level I don't want. I wouldn't mind if it was cheaper/weaker but increases your sensor profile as a downside.
Logged

Rauschkind

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 175
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2021, 09:07:46 PM »

s-mods are far from "free". they are expenisve to install and they cost an s-mod slot that could otherwhise be used for something that would improve combat performance.
i still think the op costs are exessive for something that does not affect combat performance. the downside of tug ship you used certainly are real, but imo gimping all the large ships to avoid that is not worth it.
especially: at the point where it requires 4 tugs to bring me to burn 20, my sensor profile is so big it wont matter anyway. cap ships are not exactly stealthy to begin with.
Logged

Baqar79

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #7 on: April 10, 2021, 09:13:02 PM »

Hmmm, looks like the +1 to burn speed on the Ox applies after the +100% from sustained burn, where Augmented Drives +2 translates to +4 using sustained burn.

Insulated Engine Assembly makes a pretty big dent to the emissions (though it is still very high), but with the +1 applying only to overall burn, you need 4 Ox's to replace Augmented drives unless you normally travel with sustained burn off.
Logged

Rauschkind

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 175
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #8 on: April 10, 2021, 09:17:56 PM »

the thing is, if it would cost like 10 op on a capital, i would think about fitting it or using tugs.
if it costs 40 there is nothing to think about.
Logged

Demetrious

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 73
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #9 on: April 10, 2021, 11:32:05 PM »

s-mods are far from "free". they are expenisve to install and they cost an s-mod slot that could otherwhise be used for something that would improve combat performance.
i still think the op costs are exessive for something that does not affect combat performance. the downside of tug ship you used certainly are real, but imo gimping all the large ships to avoid that is not worth it.
especially: at the point where it requires 4 tugs to bring me to burn 20, my sensor profile is so big it wont matter anyway. cap ships are not exactly stealthy to begin with.

Being able to avoid combat entirely is also very powerful. Basically it asks you to make a choice.

I personally find it's great for making ships like Atlas's supporting exploration fleets able to keep up without dragging the whole fleet down.
Logged

torbes

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #10 on: April 10, 2021, 11:38:08 PM »

S-Mod those tugs! Can get the sensor profile down to 115, seriously though I have so many SP that I modded all my civilian ships. :)
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #11 on: April 10, 2021, 11:48:24 PM »

Having another version of ADF with +1 Burn (and cheaper OP cost) would allow much more flexible fleet compositions. Right now it's optimal to exclude certain ship categories, depending on what base fleet burn you aim for.
Logged

Rauschkind

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 175
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #12 on: April 10, 2021, 11:58:16 PM »

Being able to avoid combat entirely is also very powerful. Basically it asks you to make a choice.

yeah, but its not a very difficult choice now. a wee bit more upkeep vs gimping my capitals is a no brainer.
Logged

KDR_11k

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 666
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #13 on: April 11, 2021, 12:58:47 AM »

It's definitely s-mod fodder with its current OP cost, useful for small smuggler fleets tho. For a long time I ran a fleet consisting of two revenants and one champion, optimized for speed and sensor profile to get in and out quickly without anybody noticing. I used it more for exploring than smuggling but when the story missions called for covert approaches I was in there and gone again with no trouble at all.
Logged

Maethendias

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
  • Esteemed Warlord
    • View Profile
Re: augmented field drive is very expensive for what it does
« Reply #14 on: April 11, 2021, 01:02:35 AM »

1.Oxen consume supplies like a Destroyer, burn fuel like Heavy Cruisers and come with massive sensor profiles well in excess of capital ships.  Like, truly massive.  A tug is 66% more visible to opposing fleets than a standard Cap, so 4 of them in one fleet is going to light up your fleet to other hostile fleets like a rave.  Even with insulated engines, Oxen still have nearly the sensor profile of a Capital ship.
2.One has to find tugs before one buys tugs.  In my current playthrough, I've explored ~85% of the Persean Sector, and I haven't found a single tug anywhere.
3.ADF can be built-in to a combat ship without impacting its combat performance, if desired.  Doing this also frees up 4 ship slots that'd be "burned" on maintaining Oxen, giving you a lot more combat ships or logistics ships.

storypoints
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4