Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: If fighters had a static amount instead of regen how would you balance it?  (Read 985 times)

writeru

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile

This is just a thought exercise that I think it could be fun, I actually think the  current mechanics are great. I don't meant this as an actual suggestion


I think if carriers only had a static amount of fighters they could carry into battle (like missles) one thing that would be a problems is simply running out of fighters mid-way, althought the positive aspect would be that carriers would always act like carries through the entire battle, instead of sometimes being just a empty platform for a minute or two.


Personally if I had to try to balance it, i would do the following.

-All fighters hull buffed by 100%, armor by 50%

-Destroyed fighters are replaced automatically

-Fighters flares and missles regen slowly (but not for bombers)

-Bump the amount of fighters per wing by 1 for a lot of cases, some remain the same quantity, mostly the bombers and a few others.

-The total amount of fighters you have stored in the carrier is equal the amount of fighters per wing x 4(so, if you use talons in a wing, you will have 12 talons. If you use the two wings of a drover for talons you will have 24 talons). Have certain fighters (just a few) have extra quantity of fighters stored too, along with the wing x4.


hullmods

Converted hangar: Instead of making fighters cost more CR they can store less ships (each wing store only x2 the amount of fighters). Fighters that might have an extra wings in storage have this bonus nullified.

Expanded Deck crew: The amount of stored fighters is increased (each store 5x the amount of fighters instead of 5)



My suggestions for fine tuning the quantity of fighters per wing

Number of fighters per wing unchanged

-Wasps (but the amount of wasps in storage has a flat bonus of +8 extra

-Xyphos(amount in storage has a flat bonus of +4)

-Thunder (but the amount of thunders in storage has a flat bonus of + 4 extra)

-Gladius (but the amount of gladius in storage has a flat bonus of + 4 extra)

-All bombers.  (some might need a flat bonus of fighters in storage, while others not)

+1 fighter per wing

-Talon (flat bonus of +4 extra talons per wing in storage)

-Claw

-Warthog

-Broadsword

-Lux

-Spark

+2 fighters per wing

Mining pod (and a bonus of +8 extra fighter in storage per wing)
« Last Edit: June 17, 2021, 08:19:22 PM by writeru »
Logged

The Soldier

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3804
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile

It used to be like this. Didn't last very long.

Fighters don't really need a nerf like this; this is most certainly a nerf to the capabilities of all carriers in any battle that lasts more than a few minutes (i.e. most late-game engagements).
Logged
Quote from: Trylobot
I am officially an epoch.
Quote from: Thaago
Note: please sacrifice your goats responsibly, look up the proper pronunciation of Alex's name. We wouldn't want some other project receiving mystic power.

Drone_Fragger

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 62
    • View Profile
    • Email

Fighters used to be fixed like this. It made them frankly unusable since they us to either be extremely small frigates/destroyers to avoid being lost instantly.

They were either way too strong, or way to weak because of this. Either they died instantly in a fight and did nothing or are genuinely stronger than frigates and just wiped them completely.
Logged

writeru

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile

I thought before you could use fighters without carriers, no? I didn't play back then, but that was my impression.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 9985
    • View Profile

Fighters were ships instead of weapons before v0.8a.  They could be deployed without carriers, but you wanted carriers to support them.

Before v0.6a, wings were lost permanently, but carriers could rebuild the wings in mid-battle at the cost of supplies.

Before v0.8a, starting at v0.6a, wings could not be destroyed permanently as long as there was a carrier in the fleet.  Also, fighters had CR, which represented how many reserve fighters were in the wing.  Carriers were needed in battle to replace lost fighters until the wing ran out of CR.  Immortal fighters were very important during the days of rare ships, when most ships were too rare and getting them was hard, and boarding was a crapshoot with odds no better than 37.5% in the best case.  Losing ships (and weapons too back then), hurt.

Since v0.8a, fighters became regenerating missiles and a huge OP sink for carriers.  (And Expanded Deck Crew became a tax for carriers and ruined the warship-lite role they used to have.)

Before 0.7a, everyone except the fleet commander did not have skills.  While there were no skills for fighters, it did not hurt too much because only one ship in the fleet had skills to begin with.  Then officers came in 0.7a, and player could have ten of them, and skills were stronger.  Warships with officers made carriers and fighters obsolete.  Fighters died off after about a minute of fighting.  v0.7x releases was the reign of the godship Onslaught with full skills.

Today, with weakened carriers and current skills, fighters (at least without skills) are about as gimped as they were during the 0.7x releases.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2021, 05:30:52 AM by Megas »
Logged

KDR_11k

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
    • View Profile

That would require giving players a lot more control over their fighters to not make it frustrating. Also missiles already have the role of powerful strikes with limited ammo, if fighters ran out you'd use them like missiles and not want to deploy them when there's too much threat in the area. And/or fighters would have to be so survivable that unless you send them into massed enemies they're practically guaranteed to come back.

Besides, the replacement rate going down is already a temporary form of running out. Keep shooting them down and they stop coming as quickly.
Logged

WeiTuLo

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile

In RC15, a 20 DP officered Heron will often do less damage than an 8 DP or 6 DP frigate. Sometimes even a Wolf will do more damage. But they can provide important anti-fighter/bomber cover for your ships that are vulnerable to them, like the aforementioned frigates. However, it is very expensive to do so nowadays.

Even the formerly cheap Colossus MK IIIs cost 1 more fuel/LY now, and the now weaker fighters get the full debuffs from the hangar type on top of that. So not only do they take more damage, they are slower. I think in 0.91, the dmod debuff halving skill would also apply to fighters/bombers, but that skill is no longer available.

A fast, cheap fighter/interceptor only carrier could help mitigate this.
Logged

JUDGE! slowpersun

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
    • View Profile

Fighters were ships instead of weapons before v0.8a.  They could be deployed without carriers, but you wanted carriers to support them.

Before v0.6a, wings were lost permanently, but carriers could rebuild the wings in mid-battle at the cost of supplies.

Before v0.8a, starting at v0.6a, wings could not be destroyed permanently as long as there was a carrier in the fleet.  Also, fighters had CR, which represented how many reserve fighters were in the wing.  Carriers were needed in battle to replace lost fighters until the wing ran out of CR.  Immortal fighters were very important during the days of rare ships, when most ships were too rare and getting them was hard, and boarding was a crapshoot with odds no better than 37.5% in the best case.  Losing ships (and weapons too back then), hurt.

Since v0.8a, fighters became regenerating missiles and a huge OP sink for carriers.  (And Expanded Deck Crew became a tax for carriers and ruined the warship-lite role they used to have.)

Before 0.7a, everyone except the fleet commander did not have skills.  While there were no skills for fighters, it did not hurt too much because only one ship in the fleet had skills to begin with.  Then officers came in 0.7a, and player could have ten of them, and skills were stronger.  Warships with officers made carriers and fighters obsolete.  Fighters died off after about a minute of fighting.  v0.7x releases was the reign of the godship Onslaught with full skills.

Today, with weakened carriers and current skills, fighters (at least without skills) are about as gimped as they were during the 0.7x releases.

That would require giving players a lot more control over their fighters to not make it frustrating. Also missiles already have the role of powerful strikes with limited ammo, if fighters ran out you'd use them like missiles and not want to deploy them when there's too much threat in the area. And/or fighters would have to be so survivable that unless you send them into massed enemies they're practically guaranteed to come back.

Besides, the replacement rate going down is already a temporary form of running out. Keep shooting them down and they stop coming as quickly.

While I understand why such changes to fighters has occurred, the player's inability to directly control fighter/bomber targets is ridiculous.  Fine, whatever, no space AWACs and the game isn't intended to perfectly realistic and some abstraction is necessary.  But only being able to direct fighter/bomber behavior via their parent carrier seems to be less of an intentional choice and more of a side effect from basically reusing missile code for fighters (although not a pure reuse, since fighters shoot and bombers drop bombs).  But mostly, it's ****ing stupid.  Just make redirecting fighters not cost command points...
Logged
I wasn't always a Judge...

KDR_11k

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
    • View Profile

It's ultimately an action game in the combat, your ability to command things is limited so you don't go micromanaging everything.
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3458
    • View Profile

But only being able to direct fighter/bomber behavior via their parent carrier seems to be less of an intentional choice and more of a side effect from basically reusing missile code for fighters (although not a pure reuse, since fighters shoot and bombers drop bombs).  But mostly, it's ****ing stupid.  Just make redirecting fighters not cost command points...
I suspect it is intentional, considering how powerful carriers got in 0.8. Flexibility was traded in for power.

WeiTuLo

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile

I would have carriers send out a lot more fighters at once, but have the fighters be more careful so they don't die needlessly. They would return to the carriers to repair and refit as needed.
Logged