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 2 [3] 4

Author Topic: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a  (Read 3994 times)

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1889
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #30 on: February 20, 2022, 01:12:41 PM »

I think the Apogee is a mediocre to poor combat ship that never has a use case in my fleets

If you have a decent flank setup and need an anchor to hold a fleet in place so that you can clean up the Apogee is pretty good at 18DP. It’s speed here is an advantage because you don’t want it retreating. I load mine up with squalls, a Tach Lance, and caps/hull mods the have my primary assault ships like griffins and close carriers escort it.

The result is something that holds the line for the weaker strike ships. A faster ship retreats and the griffin dies. A weaker ship explodes.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #31 on: February 20, 2022, 01:37:45 PM »

Re: vs. SIM Falcon tests
I copied the Fury loadout in the video and tried to kill the Falcon numerous times, but every attempt ended in utter failure.  Eventually, I raised caps to 35 and added Flux Coil Adjunct to push caps even higher (and sacrificing the IR Pulse Laser), but to no avail.  Only once or twice did Fury come close to overloading Falcon before turning chicken and backing off (to eventual loss).  Fury gets some pulse laser shots off before Falcon kites beyond its range and stays there.  The Sabots are usually shot down by autocannon or lr pd fire.  If I am lucky, two of the sabots (out of four shot) will hit, which puts some flux on Falcon, but not enough before Fury cowers to its death.  As for Apogee, yes, the fight can drag out before it wins, but at least it wins.

I also tried Aurora vs. Falcon with a similarly inspired loadout.  First attempt was nearly mutual kill, but Falcon won (with barely any health and CR) and Aurora lost.  Second attempt, Falcon won decisively without any hull damage.  Next three attempts, Aurora won.  At least Aurora wins some of the time, unlike Fury who never won once on my attempts with the pulse laser loadout.  On those successful attempts, Aurora used jets to close the distance and stay there enough for an extended time, or at least long enough to pummel Falcon after it dropped shields.

My problem with AI Fury is its cowardice.  Once it decides to retreat, it takes too long for it to escape because it is not very fast at going anywhere but forward.

That's a strange argument to make when comparing the Fury and the Apogee, considering the Fury has a base speed of 90 while the Apogee has a base speed of 60. The Apogee could put on Unstable Injector and still be much slower.
Why is it strange?  Fury is only fast when it plasma burns forward.  When Fury backpedals because it loses flux wars, it only has its base speed which is not fast enough to escape Falcon.  As for Apogee, it is not the one running away because it wins its flux wars against Falcon.

Aurora has an easier time escaping (because of jets), but if an ion beam zaps engines through the shields, it suffers like Fury.  So far, AI Aurora could take out Falcon, but it had more difficulty than Apogee.

That applies equally to the Apogee. It makes no sense to say the Aurora has more difficulty taking out a target than the Apogee, considering how much more speed, weapon mounts, and flux it has, so this almost certainly comes down to a bad loadout being used.
Aurora is similar to Fury, including weaknesses.  Aurora is still limited to relatively inefficient 600 range medium weapons, just like Fury.  May have effectively slightly less range because Aurora's weapons are set further back from the nose than on Fury.  Aurora has better stats, and AI is smart enough to use jets to escape, but otherwise AI Aurora still flies toward Falcon as Fury does, and when Aurora gets its flux high, it cowers like Fury, but uses Jets to escape, unless Ion Beam zaps through the shield and knocks out engines, then it is out of luck like Fury is.  I would not call it bad loadout, just bad cowardly AI.

No. The Fury is overpriced if it does not do its job for an appropriate cost.

But the job you want it to do seems kind of not what the fury is designed for. You say you don't want a tank but what you seem to want most of all is for the ship to survive and have a long PPT... I.E. you want a tank. You say you want it to be fast, but no reason for what you want it to be fast to do.

The Fury is designed to bully things with its superior stats. Its a 2 Medium Energy Cruiser with 600 base dissipation... IF you want a fast ship that is to survive and harass larger ships you want a falcon. Its 14 DP and has two forward mounted medium ballistics on 75 base speed with maneuvering thrusters.

Maybe you should consider different methods of fights instead of fighting huge fights against multiple fleets? Maybe disengage with story points if you think you will lose your fleet?
I agree with the first statement.  To me, Fury's job is to fight anything up to its DP cost like many other good ships do.  So far, Fury cannot handle anything bigger than a destroyer on its own, which would be okay if it was not as expensive as it is now.

AI Fury does okay against frigates and destroyers.  But my point capping frigates already do this, and for less cost.  I do not need Fury solely for that.  I want it to perform as well as Apogee or Eradicator, but it does not do that under AI control.  (Fury is better if I pilot it, but I have better ships to pilot.)  I hoped that Fury would be a bruiser like both Eradicators are.  After all, Eradicator is no more expensive than Fury.  But Fury has been a disappointment.  Meanwhile, Eradicator smashes things.

I want ships bigger than a frigate because I want a reason not to give up Combat and get Wolfpack Tactics (because most of my officers end up in frigates) and for uncommon extended battles like a double endgame fleet.  I want an alternative to frigates (and to Apogee and Eradicator).  I tried Shrike, but it ended up performing worse than Tempest, so that idea was scrapped.  Fury seemed like a promising one given the forum hype, but when I try it under AI control, it has been underwhelming like Shrike was.  Performance was better than Shrike, but the cost is too much just for harassing small fry.  I want Fury to survive in fights that it cannot muscle through like some other ships can.  As for using Falcon, I was disappointed with it in previous but recent releases.  The few times I tried it in this release was with burst PD spam, and it is very similar to Medusa, which is cheaper.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2022, 01:40:26 PM by Megas »
Logged

Salter

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #32 on: February 20, 2022, 03:00:43 PM »

Since im doing a current high-tech playthrough of the game, ive got three Apogee's rolling around in the fleet and they work pretty well as fire-support ships given you can mount lasers and it being relatively out of danger due to long range means you can focus on offensive mods or what have you. Squall will help it puncture shields but it doesnt really have the speed to finish ships so it needs others for support to help pin it down and kill it. Which with wolfpack it will always have two or three ships helping to drag ships in for it to burrow into tbh.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1889
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #33 on: February 20, 2022, 03:09:08 PM »

Quote from: megas
To me, Fury's job is to fight anything up to its DP cost like many other good ships do

So no ships should punch above their weight in any situation and no ships should have specific standoff value against others of higher DP?
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #34 on: February 20, 2022, 03:17:27 PM »

If a ship cannot punch its weight, let alone above it, then it is likely an inferior ship compared to one that can.
Logged

Salter

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #35 on: February 20, 2022, 08:43:16 PM »

I feel like there is something to be said for ships to punch down quickly. Like convoy raids for instance.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #36 on: February 21, 2022, 12:14:01 AM »

Aurora and Fury are hard to pilot efficiently for AI (unsurprising, since they actually aren't that strong and need to be very aware of when they can press on vs when they can't). Aurora in has very long cooldown that it must plan ahead for, and AI just doesn't. Forward only system is only barely usable on broadside Odyssey, and is crap for forward-facing Fury (no way to use it defensively).

For player-piloting Odyssey always seems like a better option than either. It's even better than Aurora at catching stuff (Odyssey's system is faster in a straight line over long term) and stronger in a straight fight. While using Odyssey's system defensively is inconvenient, it still provides decent value when player-piloted.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2980
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #37 on: February 21, 2022, 01:20:52 AM »

For player-piloting Odyssey always seems like a better option than either. It's even better than Aurora at catching stuff (Odyssey's system is faster in a straight line over long term) and stronger in a straight fight. While using Odyssey's system defensively is inconvenient, it still provides decent value when player-piloted.
This is the main reason for my post. Both Aurora and Odyssey are not common ships, they both play similarly as a flagship, but Odyssey is actually worth it and it doesn't even slow down your fleet. Fury still has a place as an early game flagship tho, 9 burn, cheap, easy to get. Aurora is basically an elite version of the Fury, but made lame in comparison to Odyssey which is a straight up upgrade.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Vanshilar

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #38 on: February 21, 2022, 02:24:47 AM »

Re: vs. SIM Falcon tests

So it turns out, I had Support Doctrine on, which gave the Falcon Helmsmanship and Combat Endurance. What does that have to do with anything? It shows how ridiculous and contrived this particular setup is. That is to say:

1. The SIM Falcon is no match for any of these ships (Fury, Apogee, Aurora) with any competent loadout. It just has a couple of Heavy Autocannons for kinetic damage, some Ion Beams for disabling, and then some Harpoon missiles as finishers. If it starts off in close range against any of these ships, it would easily get beaten. So, it basically spends it time backing off.
2. The Falcon has a top speed of 80. Maneuvering jets give it +50 speed half the time, so it comes out to +25 speed on average, so it ends up with a retreating speed of 105 on average. This speed range (80 to 105) is very important.
3. At the beginning of the fight, the ships will attack each other. The Falcon will lose and start backing off.
4. The Apogee is so slow that when the Falcon backs off, it will be out of the Falcon's Ion Beam range. This means that both ships will drop shields and reset their flux before the next encounter. This is very important.
5. The Fury and Aurora are both fast enough that after the Falcon retreats, they will still be in the range of its Ion Beams. Thus, they will keep their shields up, and they won't reset their flux. Because the Falcon's Heavy Autocannons are dealing hard flux, the hard flux on these ships will gradually accumulate, with the Falcon backing up as needed whenever it starts getting too close or starts getting hit.
6. For whatever reason, the AI doesn't recognize that it should use Plasma Burn or Plasma Jets in this situation to close the distance to use its weapons. Both the Fury and the Aurora can easily catch up to the Falcon if they used their shipsystems, but they're content to simply sit there even though their shipsystems are ready to be used. If they do actually use their shipsystem, the Falcon easily dies.
7. Once the ship is at high flux, it starts backing off. Now, the Falcon clearly uses its Maneuvering Jets to chase down the ship, so in that case the AI knows to use its shipsystem to chase a target. It's just that for whatever reason, the same thing doesn't happen for the Fury nor the Aurora.
8. In the case of a Fury with Support Doctrine, Helmsmanship gives it +10% speed, and Combat Endurance and hence 100% CR gives it another 10% speed, so it top speed increases from 90 to 108. This top speed of 108 is higher than the Falcon's average top speed (including Maneuvering Jets) of 105, so even while the Falcon is backing off, the Fury can catch up to it and kill it.

So this has nothing to do with "AI cowardice" or whatever, but simply that the speeds of these ships are in a particular band for this behavior to come out in the sim. The Apogee is so slow that it's below this band, and thus the Falcon ends up so far away that both ships will drop their shields and reset their flux. Attached is an example for if the Apogee gets fast enough (i.e. with Unstable Injector) so that its speed also falls within this band, and it ends up running into the same issue.

In an actual fight, this particular set of circumstances would virtually never happen. The AI uses its shipsystem much more liberally for whatever reason (I've even seen a Fury use its Plasma Burn to ram a Radiant, even though it was already in range of all of its weapons), and there are many more ships each with different weapon ranges, speeds, etc. So it's just an artifact of this particular setup.

To give a similarly contrived "solution" to this setup, i.e. something that works for this setup but not something you'd want to use in a real fight, you could equip an Aurora with tac lasers, graviton beams, and 2 Harpoon pods, with a mining laser somewhere in the back. The Aurora has so much flux and so many weapon mounts that it will actually max out the SIM Falcon's flux using soft flux alone (even though long-range beams are weak), and the Harpoons will finish it off. (And the mining laser? Just there to make sure the Aurora goes in, because otherwise it stays at long range because all its weapons would be long range.)

Why is it strange?  Fury is only fast when it plasma burns forward.  When Fury backpedals because it loses flux wars, it only has its base speed which is not fast enough to escape Falcon.  As for Apogee, it is not the one running away because it wins its flux wars against Falcon.

Fury has a base speed of 90, which is faster than all cruisers except the Falcon (when you include Maneuvering Jets) and the Aurora (when you include Plasma Jets). (I guess technically it's slower than Doom as well, but I'm ignoring phase ships here.) Contrived cases aside, Furies can easily beat Falcons in a one-on-one. So it can get away easily.

On the other hand, Apogee, with a base speed of 60, is equal or slower than all cruisers except Venture, Dominator (which has Burn Drive), and Mora. It's a tank, and functions more or less as heavy infantry on the battlefield. It has a large flux pool, but if that runs out (and fights are rarely "even", with local concentrations of force and many-on-one's here and there), it can't back off well. So you better hope that it doesn't get overwhelmed.

In actual combat scenarios, I've found them to be fairly similar in results, and it depends on if the fleet needs more "heavy infantry" (Apogee) or "skirmishers" (Fury). This particular setup just happens to have an edge case that realistically won't occur in actual fights. The Apogee itself doesn't actually kill the SIM Falcon in any reasonable amount of time either (I do not consider taking >7 minutes to kill a Falcon, by slowly chasing it around the map until the Falcon AI messes up due to edge-of-map issues, to be a "win").

One factor which typically gives an edge to the Fury is if you have Cryoblasters, which will have similar damage output as Plasma Cannons over the course of a fight, but only cost about half as much and only need a medium slot. It fits the Fury well since it's a finisher weapon, which allows the Fury to quickly kill off targets and move on to the next one. But Furies tend to plasma burn and flameout more often, which becomes a liability.

For player-piloting Odyssey always seems like a better option than either. It's even better than Aurora at catching stuff (Odyssey's system is faster in a straight line over long term) and stronger in a straight fight. While using Odyssey's system defensively is inconvenient, it still provides decent value when player-piloted.

I think it really depends. Odyssey-Aurora-Fury-Medusa-Shrike-Tempest are all on a continuum of speed vs power. Odyssey may be better if you like to be right in the middle of the fight but faster ships can control the flow of battle better (i.e. get to hotspots quicker, rescue ships in trouble faster, etc.). Plus Odyssey is a broadside ship which is trickier to use, and it costs a lot more DP.

Odyssey's Plasma Burn seems to give a net distance of around 320 su per use, regen once every 10 seconds, which means an average speed increase of +32. Aurora's Plasma Jets seems to give a net distance of around 430 per use, once every 11 seconds, which means an average speed increase of +39. Aurora also starts off with a 10 speed advantage, so overall, Aurora ends up roughly 20 su/s faster than Odyssey.

As the player flagship, Aurora is good for the dual Cryoblasters and all sorts of other choices available to the player in terms of weapon loadouts for a very mobile flagship. As AI goes, however, I think it's in a bit of a tough spot because the player likely wants a tough capital ship (or multiple Apogees) for the front lines, while it's better to have multiple smaller ships to chase down multiple frigates simultaneously, etc., rather than one big ship running from target to target. So it's a bit harder to "place" the Aurora within a fleet.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Logged

Salter

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #39 on: February 21, 2022, 04:44:00 AM »

Pretty much. For the point cost and the fact it gets large mounts really offsets the apogee's speed.

High tech has lots of good destroyers/frigates to outmaneuver and fold enemy fleets, but it really needs a stronger cruiser line to take advantage of it and fight capitals while the smaller ships are picking off weaker enemies and the apogee is a natural selection for most stages of the game as a result, considering there are many large weapons you can mount on it and its already strong shields.

Take that or the apogee out and high-tech has mostly unremarkable cruisers with the next best being Champion, which is midline.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2980
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #40 on: February 21, 2022, 05:07:34 AM »

Champion is basically almost a high tech ship already, just swap out the two hybrid mounts with energy ones and that's pretty much a stronger Apogee focused more on offense. With far less awkward turret arcs of course.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12118
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #41 on: February 21, 2022, 06:06:42 AM »

The reason why I tried Fury vs. Falcon is AI Furies in my fleet are dying sooner than most of my other ships, and Fury is more expensive than Shrike, and I am testing them in the SIM to see if I can find a better loadout that works.  Fury cannot solo cruisers, which... okay, that is kind of expected since most of them have higher DP cost, except Falcon.  Falcon just dominates Fury, and it has a not insignificant chance of smacking down Aurora too, at least one with hard flux loadout.

Fury trying to solo things is not that contrived if ships split up and do things on their own (like no orders and ships pick targets to fight themselves).  Falcons are not rare in endgame bounties, and they tend to be among the enemy's point cappers.

I am ignoring Omega weapons.  There are not enough for everyone, and they will go to my flagship first if I can use them, not my expendable grunts in my fleet of the day.

Quote
In actual combat scenarios, I've found them to be fairly similar in results, and it depends on if the fleet needs more "heavy infantry" (Apogee) or "skirmishers" (Fury). This particular setup just happens to have an edge case that realistically won't occur in actual fights. The Apogee itself doesn't actually kill the SIM Falcon in any reasonable amount of time either (I do not consider taking >7 minutes to kill a Falcon, by slowly chasing it around the map until the Falcon AI messes up due to edge-of-map issues, to be a "win").
At least the Apogee will live, and duels happen often enough.  At the very least, Apogee will hold its own and not need help while the rest of my fleet is busy taking out more dangerous enemies (like two or so capitals plus some destroyers in the way).  After my fleet wins the main fight, then they can chase down remaining enemies like that Falcon and kill it.  If that Apogee was a Fury instead, that Fury would be dead, and one of my other ships might peel off to deal with the Falcon if it was contesting an objective, or that Falcon free to capture a point or to reinforce the enemy my other ships are fighting.
Logged

Salter

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #42 on: February 21, 2022, 12:50:41 PM »

IMO Omega weapons on the apogee are pretty good. They are good in general, but for high-tech ships with an already pretty good profile, they do pretty well, if a bit loadout hungry.

Spoiler
Volatile Particle Driver w. dual minipulser go brrrrrr when at close range and chews apart shields when given Expanded Magazine mod. In this case, ive found that the apogee is quite capable of corralling and bullying ships bigger than itself even with a different loadout for every large omega weapon. I wouldnt go so far as to say its too overpowered, but ive not seen any breakthrough's with an Apogee out.
[close]
Logged

Flying Birdy

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #43 on: February 21, 2022, 01:23:46 PM »

This is the main reason for my post. Both Aurora and Odyssey are not common ships, they both play similarly as a flagship, but Odyssey is actually worth it and it doesn't even slow down your fleet. Fury still has a place as an early game flagship tho, 9 burn, cheap, easy to get. Aurora is basically an elite version of the Fury, but made lame in comparison to Odyssey which is a straight-up upgrade.

I think the one sentiment that is repeatedly echoed is that, by the time you get the Aurora, it's functionally outclassed by something else (Odyssey, Ziggurat, or any capital class) given its DP.

Maybe the issue isn't so much with the ship's stats, but rather is the ship's rarity. Aurora is an elite, player-piloted 8-burn ship that absolutely clobbers every other cruiser and lower class ship. But most other capital ships also does that. By the time you get the Aurora, there's already a lot of better options for killing cruisers/destroyers/frigates so the Aurora becomes a kind of rarely used ship.

I think a solution might be just to make the ship more accessible early on when fleet battles are smaller and the Aurora can be very powerful. Maybe make the Aurora a rare derelict drop from some quests or something like that so players can reliably get one into their fleet early.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2980
    • View Profile
Re: Revert Aurora nerfs from 0.9a
« Reply #44 on: February 21, 2022, 01:28:35 PM »

With all due respect, Omega weapons are completely irrelevant for the topic at hand since that's such a limited and super late game thing to add and change about ship loadouts. At that point you don't even care about specific ships you're getting, you don't care about losses. You can't claim either Fury or Aurora is strong with Cryoblasters since to even get to that point you must first use their strengths WITHOUT forbidden weapons. It's a win more situation, likewise pretty much any ship can get an upgrade with Omega weapons so I don't get the arguments in the first place. So please, for the rest of the discussion ignore Omega weapons.

EDIT:
I think a solution might be just to make the ship more accessible early on when fleet battles are smaller and the Aurora can be very powerful. Maybe make the Aurora a rare derelict drop from some quests or something like that so players can reliably get one into their fleet early.
Good idea, being so hard to get is part of the reason why it makes me sad to see it outclassed by relatively easier options. Although I have two in my current run, but that was huge luck with one contact mission, and a Tri-tach commission that spawned one in a market.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2022, 01:31:06 PM by Grievous69 »
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4