Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 18

Author Topic: A Tale of Two Tech Levels  (Read 34969 times)

Realm

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #150 on: June 01, 2021, 06:27:58 PM »

Could some armor friendly hull mods get added that are geared to low tech? I mean we have a rather powerful mods to enhance shields on ships that already have the best shields. Give armor resistance traits or something. Some hull mods specifically designed to most benefit Low tech. Every hull mod seems to be Generalized or clearly just better for High tech and a lesser extent Midline.
I do like the idea of having hullmods to better specialize what your armour protects against. Impact Mitigation before the last couple of hotfixes was very strong, but that was because it was extremely common on Officers and never had a cost for the ship. Hullmods that offer similar armour specialization would be pretty nice, doubly because using them would take away OP the ship might use elsewhere (and so likely wouldn't be ubiquitous picks).
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3786
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #151 on: June 01, 2021, 06:28:34 PM »

Aux Thrusters on the Dominator used to be a very viable choice... but that was back before player skills existed, where aux thrusters was the only option for boosting the ship's turn rate.

I do still use it sometimes, but, well, that also requires using a Dominator in the first place and they aren't my favorite cruisers.
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Retry

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #152 on: June 01, 2021, 06:43:29 PM »

I never use Aux Thrusters on purpose.  OP cost is in ITU territory; a bit too pricey for just a soft stat boost (even a big +50-100%)
Logged

Locklave

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 631
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #153 on: June 02, 2021, 02:57:11 PM »

Hmm, why does Enforcer need Auxiliary Thrusters? It has a decent turn rate and all its guns are turrets. Similarly I've never installed it on the Dominator or Onslaught so I don't think its an OP tax.

Specifically why it's OP tax? Try it out and tell me how it flies with it as compared how it flies without it or the skill, without makes it feel like you are piloting a garbage truck. I have no way to quantify it. It's like the rare find chance skill that got nerfed, it felt like an exploration tax. You didn't need it, it's viable without it, it just feels that way. These ships including the enforcer feel like they are operating in slow motion while everything else is normal time without it.

Generally speaking it's one thing to say, it's viable, it's another thing to ask is it desirable. Enforcer and the other 2 fall into the viable and not desirable I feel mainly because of their handling, which is worse in non player control. Maybe these burn changes will fix this, but I think all they will do is highlight how badly these ships handling is hurting their performance. Don't get me wrong, the burn changes are gonna be a buff they need and will certainly be a vast improvement.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2021, 03:23:54 PM by Locklave »
Logged

Sarissofoi

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #154 on: June 02, 2021, 04:48:50 PM »

What Enforcer need is AAF and inbuilt Safety Overdrive.

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #155 on: June 02, 2021, 09:47:55 PM »

What Enforcer need is AAF and inbuilt Safety Overdrive.

The Enforcer with the recent buffs this version is a good frontline combat destroyer (and I really thought it was bad last version, so I'm happy to be able to say that). Its currently competitive with the Hammerhead, Sunder, and Medusa - a little bit less powerful on balance, a lot tougher, a bit DP cheaper, good missiles. Its a staple lineship I use against everything from early game pirates all the way through Radiants and Omegas.
Logged

Locklave

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 631
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #156 on: June 03, 2021, 02:12:51 AM »

The Hammerhead is still a better ship by a clear and noteworthy margin. The power systems relative to weapons is a glaring issue alone assuming the control of when engagements happen is resolved, which still wouldn't put them at par. It's only actual advantage is the number of missiles slots. Because those extra medium Ballistic slots will run out of flux fast in a head to head.

The missile advantage fades in longer fights which should be when Low tech ship shine in theory by doctrine at which you are left with a Low tech ship without power systems to support it's guns or inefficient shields.

It's competitive because of missiles, not because of the rest of the ships design or performance. The missile slots are a crutch for the enforcer, the hammerhead continues to remain a real fighting force the entire fight because of it's performance, system and flux generation.

If High tech/Midline get more power capacity/higher flux dissipation and more efficient shields why does that also reward them with the ability to fire more? Low tech should have an across the charts discount on Ballistic weapons power costs. Give them efficient weapons at least. 

Low tech themes.

terrible
- power systems
- shield efficiency
- top speed
- acceleration
- turning speed

good
- armor
- PPT

High tech themes

great
- power systems
- shield efficiency
- top speed
- acceleration
- turning speed

terrible
- armor
- PPT

Then add via skills ways to increase PPT dramatically. Armor doesn't do much unless you are getting beat down and is useless when you have the advantage.

Hammerhead is built to do a job in fleets, enforcer is a theme ship. I find the downplaying of the problems specifically engineered for low tech extremely frustrating in this thread in general, we even have some people arguing that the Tempest was fine. I can only assume they feel the Hyperion frigate cruiser is also fine. Low techs theme in reality is Inferior tech. Dampener field, while a welcome addition is as others have clearly stated an effort to bypass the corner Low tech has been painted into.

Burns more fuel, but is still slower. Inferior tech theme at it's finest. Insert sarcastic statement about having to do that to balance out how powerful armor is here.

This thread makes me hopeful and extremely frustrated at the same time.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2021, 02:19:59 PM by Locklave »
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2980
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #157 on: June 03, 2021, 02:18:21 AM »

But they have efficient weapons already... I mean most of them at least are. If you were to buff them overall then that would just make midline stronger. The problem is low tech ships having atrocious flux stats, it's not rocket science. Actually Enforcer got all sorts of buffs to survivability but its flux remained exactly the same. Which I guess is fine balance wise but I personally don't care much for a slow ships that fires 3 shoots and then is a sitting duck. I wonder how Vanguard will affect Enforcer's viability, because it just seems like a smaller and faster version.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

tomatopaste

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 306
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #158 on: June 03, 2021, 03:14:40 AM »

Are there going to be API hooks to detect if a second ship system modifies the default combat HUD? If a plugin is rendering a custom measurement above then the current alternative seems to be checking every secondary ship system id to see if it needs to render higher on the HUD, if that is even possible.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23988
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #159 on: June 03, 2021, 09:17:32 AM »

Are there going to be API hooks to detect if a second ship system modifies the default combat HUD?

No, since the answer is "always" :)
Logged

Bob69Joe

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 74
  • Steam: Herr Derrierr with the tiger picture
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #160 on: June 03, 2021, 12:37:42 PM »

Tempests commanded by reckless officers, having two phase lance mounts, and a high scatter amplifier hull mod cause a ton of paralyzing tactical damage to capitals, cruisers, and destroyers. Those larger ships have to balance shield flux with firing larger weapon mounts. Tempests are awesome.
Logged
Search = 'site:cakravartin.com Hermetic Tradition'

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #161 on: June 03, 2021, 02:44:55 PM »

The Hammerhead is still a better ship by a clear and noteworthy margin. The power systems relative to weapons is a glaring issue alone assuming the control of when engagements happen is resolved, which still wouldn't put them at par. It's only actual advantage is the number of missiles slots. Because those extra medium Ballistic slots will run out of flux fast in a head to head.


An enforcer's advantages are having 110 OP instead of 95OP, 900 instead of 500 armor, 6000 instead of 5000 hull, double the missiles (4 instead of 2), better PD coverage (360 flaks or vulcans depending on investment), and better gun mounts (5 turreted medium ballistics which can be downgraded if needed, vs 2 fixed medium ballistics and 4 small which can't install larger guns). And being 9 DP instead of 10.

Its disadvantages are less flux to use (200 vs 250 = 50 less, or with T4L 240 vs 300 = 60 less), lower flux capacity (4000 vs 4200, IE 1 OP worth), a worse shield (1.0 vs .8 ), lower speed (we'll see how cancellable burn drive changes this, but it will certainly be interesting), and not having an offensive ship system (this is the real big one: AAF is powerful). The shield difference is real: Hammerheads have 25% more shield HP for a given capacitance, a significant advantage.

Examining the flux in more detail (with T4L effect in parenthesis), a Hammerhead with 20 vents (standard build) is going to have 450 (500) flux or 45 (50) per DP. An Enforcer is going to have 400 (440) flux, or 44.4 (48.9) per DP. Capacity depends on build because caps are usually not maxed, but Enforcers have 15 more base OP and are only 200 (1 OP) behind in capacity: it all depends on build, but the Hammerhead barely has any advantage here. So, Enforcers have less flux, but really not that much less flux. And if thinking of the amount of flux the fleet has to use (a DP based analysis) they are even closer.

A brawling fit for an Enforcer might have a Heavy Needler and 2 Heavy Mortars, for a total of 560 fps. A brawling fit for a Hammerhead of 2 Heavy Mortars and 2 Railguns has a fps of 660. But the Hammerhead has only 50 (60) more dissipation. At the same time, its shield is 100 vs an Enforcer's 80. Both of these fits are running above the flux limits by a reasonable amount, but this common Hamemrhead fit is actually more 'overgunned' than the enforcer fit. The Hammerhead has a significant DPS advantage: 2 railguns is 334 dps vs a heavy needlers 250, and the Hammerhead has a ship system to give it a big firepower boost!

For a 'sniper' fit, a common Hammerhead has either 2 HVDs or HVD + Mauler. The other 2 small guns might be LAGs or Railguns, but they won't be range matched unless its tac lasers. Either way, the point of this build is to be at range, so its going to be running either 325 or 350 flux in that band, then another ~300-320 at the 700 range band: about the same flux as the other build, with split engagement ranges.

A 'sniper fit' Enforcer with 2 HVDs and a Mauler uses 500 fps. With 400 (440) dissipation, thats a completely reasonable flux budget. This is an interesting case because the Enforcer with 3 guns has about the same firepower at max range as a Hammerhead with 2 and its system: the Hammerhead needs to close in to the 700 range band to get a firepower advantage (or use tac lasers). But at those closer range bands, the extra 2 small ballistics + AAF are a significant boost to offense.

T5L is interesting, because an additional 100 flux benefits the Enforcer more than the Hammerhead. Hammerheads are already at their max gun load - they just don't have more slots. Theoretically I could see an Enforcer with T5L and 30 Vents using 4 medium weapons, but I wasn't using this skill in my low tech game so I don't know for sure if the fit would work. With T4L: 200*1.2 + 30*10 = 540 dissipation. 3 HVDs and a Mauler would be 675 flux... thats actually the same 1.25 ratio as before, quite reasonable. I should try this build with T5L, I think Enforcers in a skilled fleet might actually have a firepower advantage over Hammerheads in sniping which would be wild (I did not expect a 4 gun flux budget to work, but with skills it does!). The HH can use their extra OP for other good things like boosting their defense, so they do get benefit from T5L, just not really an offensive benefit.

This kind of rambled on a bit, but one point other than examining the stats is that the "Enforcers can't fire their guns!" theme is actually a myth: they aren't more overfluxed than Hammerheads. They do have less firepower when using 'brawling' weapons thanks to not having an offensive ship system, worse shields, and are slower. But at the same time they have double the missiles, more OP to afford missile boosting hullmods, and a very significant toughness advantage.

Quote
The missile advantage fades in longer fights which should be when Low tech ship shine in theory by doctrine at which you are left with a Low tech ship without power systems to support it's guns or inefficient shields.

It's competitive because of missiles, not because of the rest of the ships design or performance. The missile slots are a crutch for the enforcer, the hammerhead continues to remain a real fighting force the entire fight because of it's performance, system and flux generation.

...

I think this is a misunderstanding of low tech ships. The things they have more of are limited resources: armor, hull, and missiles. They are not endurance ships: they are ships that use limited resources to get kills (which unfortunately the AI is not great at, though aggressive/reckless officers and full assault helps). The long PPT is "nice" (and it lets them win in some edge cases) but not nearly as defining as armor and missiles.

Its bizarre to call the weapon slots available to a ship a "crutch" though. Like if I call a Hammerhead competitive only because of its 'crutch' of a ship system, not because of the rest of its design or performance... ok, yeah, the ship would underperform without the system but that doesn't matter because it has the system. If the ship is competitive, its competitive, we can't just ignore parts of it.

Missiles are the most powerful weapon type, so just dismissing them because they are limited isn't really realistic. There are situations where missiles run out, but by the time they do they've done lots of damage to the enemy. When I did a low tech themed playthrough, they lasted long enough for my ships to still have missiles at the point where multi-Radiant/multi-capital enemy fleets were broken and reduced to an incoming stream thats easily mopped up.

Quote
... I find the downplaying of the problems specifically engineered for low tech extremely frustrating in this thread in general...

I empathize with this: There are real ways in which low tech is less competitive than high tech, and burn drive is one of them: its not right to downplay problems and all it does is hurt attempts to make low tech ships fun to play. But its also not right to ignore their strengths and not accept that others make the tech level work. I'm not going to claim low tech is overpowered or more powerful: its not, its a bit weaker! But really only a bit. It can still be used from early game to endgame and win all fights.

In that other thread where there were people who didn't use high tech frigates in a good way and claimed that they weren't extremely powerful: you use them in a much better way and know that they really are. The same kind of thing applies here: you aren't getting success with low tech, but that doesn't necessarily mean that low tech is awful and completely broken, just that you haven't gotten success with them yet.
Logged

Arcagnello

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1011
  • Arguably Heretical, Definetly Insane
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #162 on: June 03, 2021, 03:02:29 PM »

Impressive Enforcer Essay @Thaago, if I do say so myself. Accurate to the smallest details too!
That not-so-small bowling ball of a Destroyer truly has become one of Low tech's strongest assets, whether you think that's amazing or an excuse to showcase just how much Low tech has fallen down the "balance stairs" as of late.

Oh, one more thing:
I quickly looked up Affectionado on the intrawebs and it came up as "Common misspelling of aficionado". That's what happens when you listen to religious fanatics, really; unless you actually knew this beforehand and you're simply holding onto the monicker bestowed upon you by some unknown crazy luddite, in which case you can totally have tea with him at a local bar whenever you feel like it  ;)
« Last Edit: June 03, 2021, 03:08:34 PM by Arcagnello »
Logged
Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.
The therapist removed my F5 key.

Locklave

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 631
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #163 on: June 03, 2021, 03:37:00 PM »

About the enforcer and related back into my main point. They are overfluxed because of their shields taking damage and being inefficient in all flux regards. Which is the same problem the Dampening Field is working around, the problem was acknowledged in this thread without acknowledging the problem is effecting all low tech.

So it's not a myth unless they are in a position to fire without taking fire. Which is not a reasonable expectation.

If dampening fields were older reliable tech they used before shields, common on newer Low tech designs because they are easier to maintain/cheaper then shields. Then there is a design element to pull Low tech together in a functionally unique way. But that's not were this is going, it's gonna be on a couple of ships. The rest will remain "viable", but not desirable in a fleet unless they were free.

Does 1 point of armor on a Low tech block more then 1 point on a High tech/Midline? No. But we get that for shields. Because the Flux Capacity/Flux Dissipation disparities weren't big enough I guess.

I'm at a completely loss as to what Low tech is even intended to be anymore. I associate negative ship traits to it. Based on their descriptions you'd think they were heavily armored ships that excel in slugging matches rather then finesse and are extremely dependable and reliable. PPT suggest longer fights should be their strength vs High tech, but that means less then nothing.

In reality they have heavy armor and a list of bad traits.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: A Tale of Two Tech Levels
« Reply #164 on: June 03, 2021, 09:16:09 PM »

With respect to shields: yes they take 25% more damage than a .8 midline ship - its significantly worse, but in my experience it does not cause the ships with the loadouts I posted above to stop firing completely. It matters and is going to lower the fire rate, but the full weapon load is still only 1.25 times dissipation, so its not that bad. The ships do lower their shields at high flux and start taking hits on armor while firing: they don't do it nearly as well as a player does, but they'll do it.

Quote
... Does 1 point of armor on a Low tech block more then 1 point on a High tech/Midline? No. ...

They do because the higher the armor, the more damage is mitigated, and low tech has more armor. At 900 armor instead of 500 for example for example anything thats large enough to not be at minimum vs both does more damage to the Hammerhead (anything over 88 penetration to start, and then less as armor gets worn away). And then they have more residual armor, so each point of hull blocks more.

Its still a finite resource unlike shields, but more damage is blocked per number.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 18