Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22

Author Topic: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.1 - 04/04/24  (Read 183805 times)

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #300 on: March 26, 2024, 04:35:10 PM »

I will try but unfortunately I won't have access to my PC until the weekend.   :(
That is OK, it is just a kind request no rush needed. I appreciate you making the effort.

5ColouredWalker

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #301 on: March 27, 2024, 03:22:01 AM »

While I could be wrong I was assuming that 5ColouredWalker meant that the ships would by default have built-in fighters that can't normally be swapped out for other fighters unless the ship/ships are fitted with a hullmod specifically for those ships that would unlock the built-in fighters and allow them to be replaced by fighters of your choice.
So if I have a ship with built in wings, this theoretical hull mod would unlock them and allow them to be open wing slots? I guess I'll wait until 5ColouredWalker sheds some light on that but I certainly appreciate the quick response.

Shogouki has the right of it.
As for taking code,.I don't think either mod has something that does that so no help there.


And Synergy mounts can't take Hybrid weapons, so the Danube can't take Mining lasers. I think. I'll check come morning.

That said, Mellenia and Mechabellum have been eating my time. Not done much Starsector lately.
Logged

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #302 on: March 27, 2024, 05:26:38 AM »

While I could be wrong I was assuming that 5ColouredWalker meant that the ships would by default have built-in fighters that can't normally be swapped out for other fighters unless the ship/ships are fitted with a hullmod specifically for those ships that would unlock the built-in fighters and allow them to be replaced by fighters of your choice.
So if I have a ship with built in wings, this theoretical hull mod would unlock them and allow them to be open wing slots? I guess I'll wait until 5ColouredWalker sheds some light on that but I certainly appreciate the quick response.

Shogouki has the right of it.
As for taking code,.I don't think either mod has something that does that so no help there.
Thank you for checking in. I am unsure if I can do that level of code but I can certainly try.
And Synergy mounts can't take Hybrid weapons, so the Danube can't take Mining lasers. I think. I'll check come morning.
I just checked, the Danube variant is armed with two mining lasers.
That said, Mellenia and Mechabellum have been eating my time. Not done much Starsector lately.
I remember looking into Mellenia but saw a lot of negative reviews so never got into it. I had not heard of Mechabellum though so I looked it over and it looks like something I would like so thank you for that. With all the updating work I have been doing on my mods over the last couple weeks, I haven't really been playing Starsector myself. I do plan to get caught up and eventually do so but I get the burnout and wanting to play a different genre to refresh yourself.

Aaroooon

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #303 on: March 28, 2024, 04:08:01 PM »

Hey there, I've been looking into the fighters a bit more, and the Barkentine post nerf.

My findings so far are this, MOST of the fighters from CFT are fine in terms of balancing. Skiffs, Dinghys, also the more powerful ones.
The two biggest problems I have found so far are the Skjold and the Cutter. The Skjold is slightly weaker than the cutter just because it is missing a fighter per wing, it does incredible kinetic pressure, 195 per dart gun so roughly 800 damage against shields, and still 200 against armour, plus an additional 300 to both shields and armour from it's wavemotion pulse lasers, so each fighter puts out around 500 against armour plus some EMP, and 1100 against shields.
For reference, Broadswords as the best kinetic fighters in the base game do around 600 damage against shields and 150 against armour.
The Skjold has one less fighter per wing and it does cost 50% more OP, it is definitely a lot better than the Broadswords, especially since it has 400 armour compared to the Broadswords' 100.
I think a pretty good nerf would be something like taking it's Flare launcher away, since even without that it has such a ridiculous amount of armour, it doesn't even need it to be a top tier fighter.

Then there is the cutter, cutters are really really really really strong.
800 frag damage from the culverin, so 200 against shields and armour, plus another 300 from the wavemotion pulses. So it does 500 damage per fighter against shields, falling behind the Skjold a bit since 2 skjolds would do 2200 shield damage per second, while 3 Cutters only do 1500, but it has much better armour damage, also 1500, while Skjolds only do 1000.
They do have only half the armour of the skjolds, but one more fighter per wing means an extra fighter thats launching flares, and an extra fighter shooting down other figher wings for PD purposes.

I'd suggest just taking away one of the pulses, same for the skjolds honestly, the damage they do even without is still really really good. Or, let them have their really high damage but make some of it beam based, so they can't flux shields to the extend they can now, forcing you to somehow pressure the shields more to get the value from the fighters.

And this brings me to the synergistic effect of Cutters plus Barkentine, larger wings do better on the Barkentine because it's ability means more new wings get spawned.
So with a single Barkentine you can normally have 9 Cutters, during the ability 18. This means you're putting out 9000 damage per second against shields and armour.
I've found that 2 Barkentines usually murder a Paragon relatively quickly without issue if they have nothing but Cutters.
I also attempted an Onslaught against 2 Barkentines and the result was pretty laughable, it kinda just gets murdered between them.

I've done my testing with Officers but no skills on them enhancing the fighters or speed of the Barkentine, or it's ability, and no fleet wide abilities to make fighters better either.

Right now I will admit, using Barkentines is a looooot of fun and so are the two fighters I mentioned, but I think they are a bit too strong at this moment, especially once you buffs from skills and other ships into the mix.

I think to make it a bit more reasonable you need to tweak a few things, first, make the extra wings spawned from the ability use fighter capacity if they are destroyed as well, as far as I can tell right now they do not.
Then, the cooldown for the ability needs to be longer, it is incredibly strong right now, with it the Barkentine can actually nuke weaker capitals on it's own by using Cutters.
Maybe make it so that you get a Cooldown reduction for each wing that returns without dying, with the shortest if all wings return being something slightler longer than right now or around the same, because right now you simply spam the ability whenever, since there is no cost to the fighters dying, you simply get to spam free wings to do an incredible amount of damage over and over.
Honestly, even with 2 fighter wings rather than 3 the ship would probably be one of the best carriers in the game, but right now it is honestly broken for it's cost, especially in conjunction with one of the two fighter types I talked about.
Maybe another way to deal with the ability would be to only spawn an extra wing for each of the wings currently active, because right now even if the ship is caught without any fighters, it can fully deploy its entire set of fighters.
Now that I am thinking about it, I might like that better, make the extra fighters use fighter capacity, dont reduce the cooldown tooooo much, but only spawn an extra fighter for each fighter not currently being replaced. That way it cant spam wave after wave over and over even when its main fighters are regenerating or dying to just suicide in, instead you have to slow down, get your fighters and then send them together, or just spawn fewer. That might be a good trade off.

I've also taken out any consideration from other mods I use, like Exo-Tech stuff allowing to add an extra fighter wing on ships, which obviously breaks the Barkentine beyond belief, since I understand you can't balance for what other mods may or may not add.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2024, 04:57:23 PM by Aaroooon »
Logged

Morrow

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #304 on: March 28, 2024, 06:10:59 PM »

Heya!

This mod looks awesome and I'd love to give it a try. Is there any chance of a non-Nex required version?
Logged
Discord: Morrow#1453

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #305 on: March 29, 2024, 01:38:52 AM »

Hey there, I've been looking into the fighters a bit more, and the Barkentine post nerf.
Hello, good to hear from you again Aaroooon. I got a big ole mug of coffee and I'm ready to dig into this meaty reply :)
My findings so far are this, MOST of the fighters from CFT are fine in terms of balancing. Skiffs, Dinghys, also the more powerful ones.
I am unsure regarding the parsing of this sentence. Do you mean that the Skiff and Dinghy are the exception and too OP or they are the better balanced ones?
The two biggest problems I have found so far are the Skjold and the Cutter. The Skjold is slightly weaker than the cutter just because it is missing a fighter per wing, it does incredible kinetic pressure, 195 per dart gun so roughly 800 damage against shields, and still 200 against armour, plus an additional 300 to both shields and armour from it's wavemotion pulse lasers, so each fighter puts out around 500 against armour plus some EMP, and 1100 against shields.
The Skjold is 12 OP with a crew of 3, 200 max flux, dissipation of 85 and refit of 10.
The Cutter is 7 OP, a drone with no crew, 400 flux, dissipation of 150 and a refit of 8.
When I made them I did not consider them rivals but I did balance the larger Skjold by giving it less flux whereas the Cutter is far more able to keep the pressure on. On paper it may seem the Skjold has incredible pressure but in my tests it unleashes a good first salvo but then runs out of flux fast and has a lot more downtime vs the Cutter.
For reference, Broadswords as the best kinetic fighters in the base game do around 600 damage against shields and 150 against armour.
The Skjold has one less fighter per wing and it does cost 50% more OP, it is definitely a lot better than the Broadswords, especially since it has 400 armour compared to the Broadswords' 100.
I think a pretty good nerf would be something like taking it's Flare launcher away, since even without that it has such a ridiculous amount of armour, it doesn't even need it to be a top tier fighter.
Well as I state earlier, I balanced that armor by giving it such a small flux capacity and regen. The flare launcher was to tie in with the theme of the Skjold being a big chunky fighter that can hang in there to soak up some PD while the more flux efficient ones can deal the damage.
Then there is the cutter, cutters are really really really really strong.
800 frag damage from the culverin, so 200 against shields and armour, plus another 300 from the wavemotion pulses. So it does 500 damage per fighter against shields, falling behind the Skjold a bit since 2 skjolds would do 2200 shield damage per second, while 3 Cutters only do 1500, but it has much better armour damage, also 1500, while Skjolds only do 1000.
They do have only half the armour of the skjolds, but one more fighter per wing means an extra fighter thats launching flares, and an extra fighter shooting down other figher wings for PD purposes.
I'd suggest just taking away one of the pulses, same for the skjolds honestly, the damage they do even without is still really really good. Or, let them have their really high damage but make some of it beam based, so they can't flux shields to the extend they can now, forcing you to somehow pressure the shields more to get the value from the fighters.
Rather than taking away one of it's pulse weapons, what if I change the firing arc on the Culverin from 360 to say 45 degrees? It is already rear facing but with this proposed change it will focus on being a pd mount as intended and that will remove that 800 fragmentation from the calculation vs the main target and work as intended as a defensive weapon vs interceptors and/or missiles.   
And this brings me to the synergistic effect of Cutters plus Barkentine, larger wings do better on the Barkentine because it's ability means more new wings get spawned.
So with a single Barkentine you can normally have 9 Cutters, during the ability 18. This means you're putting out 9000 damage per second against shields and armour.
I've found that 2 Barkentines usually murder a Paragon relatively quickly without issue if they have nothing but Cutters.
I also attempted an Onslaught against 2 Barkentines and the result was pretty laughable, it kinda just gets murdered between them.
Interesting OK I'll do some tests on my end.
I've done my testing with Officers but no skills on them enhancing the fighters or speed of the Barkentine, or it's ability, and no fleet wide abilities to make fighters better either.

Right now I will admit, using Barkentines is a looooot of fun and so are the two fighters I mentioned, but I think they are a bit too strong at this moment, especially once you buffs from skills and other ships into the mix.
Well fun is intended, two destroyers taking out a capital, not so much :)
I think to make it a bit more reasonable you need to tweak a few things, first, make the extra wings spawned from the ability use fighter capacity if they are destroyed as well, as far as I can tell right now they do not.
Then, the cooldown for the ability needs to be longer, it is incredibly strong right now, with it the Barkentine can actually nuke weaker capitals on it's own by using Cutters.
Maybe make it so that you get a Cooldown reduction for each wing that returns without dying, with the shortest if all wings return being something slightler longer than right now or around the same, because right now you simply spam the ability whenever, since there is no cost to the fighters dying, you simply get to spam free wings to do an incredible amount of damage over and over.
Honestly, even with 2 fighter wings rather than 3 the ship would probably be one of the best carriers in the game, but right now it is honestly broken for it's cost, especially in conjunction with one of the two fighter types I talked about.
Maybe another way to deal with the ability would be to only spawn an extra wing for each of the wings currently active, because right now even if the ship is caught without any fighters, it can fully deploy its entire set of fighters.
Now that I am thinking about it, I might like that better, make the extra fighters use fighter capacity, dont reduce the cooldown tooooo much, but only spawn an extra fighter for each fighter not currently being replaced. That way it cant spam wave after wave over and over even when its main fighters are regenerating or dying to just suicide in, instead you have to slow down, get your fighters and then send them together, or just spawn fewer. That might be a good trade off.
Ok that is some good reasoning and I'll break it down better when I get to CFT again.
I've also taken out any consideration from other mods I use, like Exo-Tech stuff allowing to add an extra fighter wing on ships, which obviously breaks the Barkentine beyond belief, since I understand you can't balance for what other mods may or may not add.
I really appreciate that. I see people on discord make claims about my ships being able to do things but it is generally with the mention of putting a max level officer or some hullmod from another mod. Keeping it variant vs variant is a much better method of comparison and how I try to balance ships when I make them. I certainty do not always get it right so I appreciate when feedback is comparable to how I balance. You've given me some interesting things to think on and I will break your comments down to bullet points for a to-do working changelog for when I get back to CFT. I just finished a substantial time chunk of work on Hiver and TTSC is next on the list but CFT will make it after that.

Heya!
Hello there, I recognized your name but couldn't place it so I went back and saw you were the author of Smugglers' Tricks back in the day. Welcome back to the forums.
This mod looks awesome and I'd love to give it a try. Is there any chance of a non-Nex required version?
Well for a fellow smuggler I can certainly try. I do have an option on one of my other mods but it's not a 1:1 comparison since it generates it's assets differently but I can take my notes from that as a starting point and add that to the next CFT update. As I state earlier, I have some work to do on one of my other mods so I cannot give an accurate ETA as I generally have more free time on the weekends but with Easter this week that free time will be spent with family.

Thank you both for the nice words and ideas for CFT adjustments. My mods would be so much worse if it were not for comments from players that give me good ideas and frankly keep me grounded. :)

Aaroooon

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #306 on: March 29, 2024, 05:45:50 AM »

Quote
I am unsure regarding the parsing of this sentence. Do you mean that the Skiff and Dinghy are the exception and too OP or they are the better balanced ones?

No no, I meant most fighters in CFT's lineup feel pretty balanced, some examples for the ones that feels balanced are the Skiff and Dinghy.

Quote
When I made them I did not consider them rivals but I did balance the larger Skjold by giving it less flux whereas the Cutter is far more able to keep the pressure on. On paper it may seem the Skjold has incredible pressure but in my tests it unleashes a good first salvo but then runs out of flux fast and has a lot more downtime vs the Cutter.

Honestly, the only reason I am bringing them up together is because they are both very very strong. I agree the Cutter is actually better than the Skjold. I think the Cutters would be a trade off for the same OP, killing a bit better, overloading shields slower but providing slightly more screens for bombers.

I think one of the reasons that might be supercharging them a bit right now is the fact that they sidestep some of the low flux with the barkentine.
Because you spawn new wings that can unload every time you pop the ability and they are quite sturdy so they can usually get to their target, unload a few volleys and by the time they die the ability is usually almost back up again even against capitals.

I tried sendnig a Barkentine against a standard loadout Conquest, I did give it Safety Overrides so Im not sure if it might get caught without, but with it the conquest died by the time the ability comes out for the 3rd - 4th time usually, although I only ran it a few times.
Keep in mind, Im doing most of these tests just with Cutters, since I think Skjolds generally do almost the same but slightly worse, better at killing shields but not as scary when your shields are down.

Quote
Rather than taking away one of it's pulse weapons, what if I change the firing arc on the Culverin from 360 to say 45 degrees? It is already rear facing but with this proposed change it will focus on being a pd mount as intended and that will remove that 800 fragmentation from the calculation vs the main target and work as intended as a defensive weapon vs interceptors and/or missiles.   

Honestly try it, I think its a good start cause it would lower the Kinetic pressure against shields quite a bit, and it would also mean that once your armour is down you just dont instantly die to 800 frag dps from each fighter hitting your hull.

I'll keep checking on them and see how they perform compared to some other vanilla fighters and against capitals.

A large chunk of their power does come from the Barkentine as well, although I do want to clarify, I did try a control group with 3 Broadswords on the Barkentine as well, and usually they performed a lot worse than both the Skjolds and the Cutters, because a lot of Capitals, especially Low Tech ones can shrug off a lot of that damage while lowering shields, against Cutters they often just take too much damage quickly, Skjolds still do okay, but not nearly as well as Cutters. Both the Skjolds and Cutters are a lot scarier against things that aren't shields, compared to the Broadswords, although the Skjolds honestly felt fine, I think the reason I call them a bit too strong is because of the way they annhilate shields. This is why Cutters feel stronger because they don't really need another ship to shoot the enemy or another type of bomber to do damage when the shields are being pressured, just by using more Cutters you overload the shields and once they are down they start doing a pretty good amount of damage and stripping the armour off the target all by themselves. So the Skjold just feels like Broadsword on steroids, the Cutter feels like a Broadsword that actually murders you the second your shields are down. And on top of that they're also pretty strong at shooting down other fighters of course, not insane, but you know, it just gives another reason to not use anything else. Why grab an interceptor if you can just spam an extra wing of cutters, do way more damage to ships and still get a pretty decent interceptor.

« Last Edit: March 29, 2024, 05:48:26 AM by Aaroooon »
Logged

Morrow

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #307 on: March 29, 2024, 08:58:03 AM »

Hello there, I recognized your name but couldn't place it so I went back and saw you were the author of Smugglers' Tricks back in the day. Welcome back to the forums.

I can't believe people still remember that! I think there's a similar in the base game now funny enough ;D

No pressure on anything friend just was curious if it would be a simple change or not. Love the ships. Vanilla+ runs are sometimes hard to find content for haha.
Logged
Discord: Morrow#1453

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #308 on: March 29, 2024, 09:23:18 AM »

Quote
I am unsure regarding the parsing of this sentence. Do you mean that the Skiff and Dinghy are the exception and too OP or they are the better balanced ones?

No no, I meant most fighters in CFT's lineup feel pretty balanced, some examples for the ones that feels balanced are the Skiff and Dinghy.
Ah, OK. The more I read your post the more I thought that was the case but I just wanted to make sure I was not missing anything.
Quote
When I made them I did not consider them rivals but I did balance the larger Skjold by giving it less flux whereas the Cutter is far more able to keep the pressure on. On paper it may seem the Skjold has incredible pressure but in my tests it unleashes a good first salvo but then runs out of flux fast and has a lot more downtime vs the Cutter.

Honestly, the only reason I am bringing them up together is because they are both very very strong. I agree the Cutter is actually better than the Skjold. I think the Cutters would be a trade off for the same OP, killing a bit better, overloading shields slower but providing slightly more screens for bombers.

I think one of the reasons that might be supercharging them a bit right now is the fact that they sidestep some of the low flux with the barkentine.
Because you spawn new wings that can unload every time you pop the ability and they are quite sturdy so they can usually get to their target, unload a few volleys and by the time they die the ability is usually almost back up again even against capitals.
Well I cannot really judge a wing strength when it is using a special from a carrier. If that is the case when you use a carrier with no special abilities or hull mods then I can take a look at adjusting the wing's refit, which I believe is 10 for the Skjold, as a way of balancing.
I tried sendnig a Barkentine against a standard loadout Conquest, I did give it Safety Overrides so Im not sure if it might get caught without, but with it the conquest died by the time the ability comes out for the 3rd - 4th time usually, although I only ran it a few times.
Keep in mind, Im doing most of these tests just with Cutters, since I think Skjolds generally do almost the same but slightly worse, better at killing shields but not as scary when your shields are down.
Well try that same setup but with Broadswords and see what happens. I did make them better than the Broadsword in some ways but also with some weaknesses. I did not see the need to add wings that were direct analogs to vanilla.
Quote
Rather than taking away one of it's pulse weapons, what if I change the firing arc on the Culverin from 360 to say 45 degrees? It is already rear facing but with this proposed change it will focus on being a pd mount as intended and that will remove that 800 fragmentation from the calculation vs the main target and work as intended as a defensive weapon vs interceptors and/or missiles.   

Honestly try it, I think its a good start cause it would lower the Kinetic pressure against shields quite a bit, and it would also mean that once your armour is down you just dont instantly die to 800 frag dps from each fighter hitting your hull.
Yea that is what I was thinking. Also it would put that rear mount in the position it was meant for. In retrospect I honestly am unsure why I gave it a 360 arc in the first place.
I'll keep checking on them and see how they perform compared to some other vanilla fighters and against capitals.
The issue may be a mix of the Barkentine's ability combined with the wing's strength. If you plan to do more testing keep that in mind. Maybe use another carrier with Cutters and this way we can better determine what is the true cause. If the Broadsword vs Cutter scenario performs differently on another carrier then it may be more a Barkentine issue.
A large chunk of their power does come from the Barkentine as well, although I do want to clarify, I did try a control group with 3 Broadswords on the Barkentine as well, and usually they performed a lot worse than both the Skjolds and the Cutters, because a lot of Capitals, especially Low Tech ones can shrug off a lot of that damage while lowering shields, against Cutters they often just take too much damage quickly, Skjolds still do okay, but not nearly as well as Cutters. Both the Skjolds and Cutters are a lot scarier against things that aren't shields, compared to the Broadswords, although the Skjolds honestly felt fine, I think the reason I call them a bit too strong is because of the way they annhilate shields. This is why Cutters feel stronger because they don't really need another ship to shoot the enemy or another type of bomber to do damage when the shields are being pressured, just by using more Cutters you overload the shields and once they are down they start doing a pretty good amount of damage and stripping the armour off the target all by themselves. So the Skjold just feels like Broadsword on steroids, the Cutter feels like a Broadsword that actually murders you the second your shields are down. And on top of that they're also pretty strong at shooting down other fighters of course, not insane, but you know, it just gives another reason to not use anything else. Why grab an interceptor if you can just spam an extra wing of cutters, do way more damage to ships and still get a pretty decent interceptor.
I made the wings in this mod to to work with each other when I planned them out prior to release. In theory the fighters, interceptors and bombers synergize with each other. The fighters were more to harass while the interceptors well frankly intercepted other wings so the Bombers could do the heavy lifting. I reason I stated earlier that I did not consider the Skjold and the Cutter as rivals is that one is a drone and one is manned so when I balanced them it was with the other drones/manned in the lineup. If a fighter is taking the role of a bomber then that is certainly something I need to address.

Thank you for the follow up, I am looking forward to your conclusions after you do your proposed testing. The more clarity I have the better I can address your concerns.
Hello there, I recognized your name but couldn't place it so I went back and saw you were the author of Smugglers' Tricks back in the day. Welcome back to the forums.

I can't believe people still remember that! I think there's a similar in the base game now funny enough ;D
Heh yea I am an old fart and been playing since the game was called Starfarer :)
No pressure on anything friend just was curious if it would be a simple change or not. Love the ships. Vanilla+ runs are sometimes hard to find content for haha.
That was brought to my attention quite clearly with Hiver Swarm. I spent a good chuck of time making a vanilla+ version of it recently as I incorrectly assumed other players use many mods when they play using one of my mods. As to Nexerelin, I have been playing with that enabled for so long I sort of just think of it as part of the base game when I make mods. It's wrong of course so thank you for brining me back to reality. :)

Shogouki

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #309 on: March 29, 2024, 02:56:16 PM »

I definitely don't think that the Cutters and Skjolds are taking the role of bombers, they do tear through lightly armored targets but anything with moderate to heavy armor stalls them a lot.  And even though they're tanky any ship with good PD isn't going to be threatened unless we're talking like 1 on 1 in a sim.  In fleet battles they've been very effective at chewing up light targets but aside from shield pummeling they don't stand much of a chance at heavy targets in fleet warfare.
Logged

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #310 on: March 29, 2024, 03:28:56 PM »

I definitely don't think that the Cutters and Skjolds are taking the role of bombers, they do tear through lightly armored targets but anything with moderate to heavy armor stalls them a lot.  And even though they're tanky any ship with good PD isn't going to be threatened unless we're talking like 1 on 1 in a sim.  In fleet battles they've been very effective at chewing up light targets but aside from shield pummeling they don't stand much of a chance at heavy targets in fleet warfare.
Thank you for your analysis, I will keep it in mind when I get to CFT. I *should* have some free time tomorrow to knock out a TTSC update and if that hold true then CFT will be next in the queue. Figure some time next week, next weekend at the latest I'll have a CFT update out so any more observations before then will be considered as well.

Aaroooon

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #311 on: March 30, 2024, 08:15:25 AM »

Alright so I've started doing some other testing, I am still convinced Cutters are a bit overtuned.

First my set up, I grabbed some vanilla carriers, in this case Herons and Condors.
They weren't equipped with much weaponry, the Herons had PD and Pilums, so nothing significant, the Condors had Hellfire Mirvs from CFT.

The first round of testing was a against a Paragon, from testing before Paragons usually take the most time even if youre able to beat them just because Fortress shield stalls a lot.
At 30 DP, so 3 Condors or a Heron and a Condor, they are able to beat the Paragon eventually, but it takes minutes and a lot of kiting.
At 40 DP so 2 Herons, 1 Heron and 2 Condors, or 4 Condors they pretty much dominate the Paragon with Cutters, ususally the time to kill is around a minute to a minute and a half.

Condors have the benefit of more wings per DP, while the Herons ability seems to make up for it quite a bit, keeping the time relatively even wether you use one or the other.

When deploying full DP of the Paragon, so 60, it dies. It delays a little with Fortress Shield, but that's about the only thing keeping it alive for any time, it looks like around 20 seconds, maybe 30 if it's lucky.

But it does seem like the more you spam, the stronger it becomes. In this instance, the Herons dominated the Paragon and it died after trying to get rid of the first wave of flux, with the Condor's it died before even getting to that point. I assume this is just because as you stack more and more it gets difficult for the Herons to keep up, since they pop their ability even into the Fortress shield, while the Condor pressure is consistent, so they end up performing better against the Paragon.

Next is the Onslaught, this one does really well actually, he beats the Condors at full deployment points, 40 to 40 and with the Herons it's a toss up. They sometimes kite, but somtimes the AI just gets stuck on the corner of the map lettign the Onslaught catch it, but, I would take this with a biiiiig grain of salt. The simulation Onslaught, for some reason, has 4 Flak Cannons, 2 Devestators and a Dual Flak Cannon on top, I don't know why it is specifically built to be this PD heavy with relatively little forward facing power, but needless to say, that Paragon won't be any real danger to most ships in your fleet with that loadout.

Next the Conquest, full DP so 40 just kills it no question, against 30 DP it's a bit of a toss up, 3 Condors beat it sometimes, and sometimes they don't, it depends if the Conquest gets to rush into one of them before it takes significant damage.
A Heron and Condor kill the Conquest 5/5 times, sometimes quicker sometimes slower, 2/5 the Condor died before the Conquest did but then the Heron kills it anyway, usually the fight takes under a minute depending on how much kiting happens.

So far, to me, it looks like if you have a capital ship with lots of mounts and use almost all of them exclusively for PD, then you can deal with the Cutters. Otherwise you get overwhelmed.
Speed is also a big thing, speedier capitals get gimped a lot less by the fighters in these simulations, since they can try to engage the Cruiser.
Of course, in an actual fleet battle this drawback might not be there, I might do some testing with more elaborate fleet set ups, but I am pretty convinced with the ability to project force to different areas of the battle with the fighters, they probably wouldn't do worse than in the simulation.

I attempted to fight the Astral as well, but it has 4 Bomber wings as standard, so it's not really a tough fight, even 2 Herons just with Cutters kill it quickly, so it's not worth testing much more.


Now I am going to say, of course mixing some bombers, maybe some Daggers, will increase the efficiency of killing certain things, the Onslaught for example doesn't really die to it if you do 4 Cutters 2 Daggers instead of 6 Cutters, but it can't chase you since it needs to keep it's shields up way more.

But so far, Cutters, even without the Barkentine, are very strong and can do a lot of things without needing anything else to support. As Shogouki said before, they aren't bombers, and they annihilate lightly armoured targets, but I have to disagree somewhat because they perform very well against capitals too, not just in terms of pressuring their shields while your other ships kill them, but to the point of actually being able to kill them in a lot of cases.
Logged

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #312 on: March 30, 2024, 12:31:27 PM »

Wow Aaroooon, I am floored with all the work you put into that. I am always humbled when players care so much about my mods that they put the effort into helping me balance them. Thank you for the detailed analysis and I will certainly refer back to it when I get around to the next CFT update.

CV514

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #313 on: March 30, 2024, 03:14:38 PM »

CFT_danube.ship still have "tow_cable" in builtInMods, despite being deprecated hullmod.
Logged

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Carter's Freetraders - V 2.0 - 03/17/24
« Reply #314 on: March 30, 2024, 03:19:50 PM »

CFT_danube.ship still have "tow_cable" in builtInMods, despite being deprecated hullmod.
Hello again. The same reason that it does not show up correctly in CFT is the same in JYD. The hull mod effect does work as intended, it is just the text that is formatted incorrectly. As it is based on game code, I cannot change it on me end w/out re-writing it entirely. I had tried once but it did not work but I did not put too much effort into it at the time since the mod effect itself does work. I do have a CFT update in the queue and I will try again for that patch.
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22