Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95.1a is out! (12/10/21); Blog post: Hostile Activity (09/01/22)

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

Author Topic: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?  (Read 2703 times)

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 6543
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #30 on: August 06, 2022, 10:57:02 AM »

Re: Harpoon vs Hurricane:
Harpoon is a higher burst for its cost; 4x750=3000 for 10 OP, medium mount vs 9*500=4500 for 25 OP, large mount, and has a refire time of 8.25 vs 15. It has moderately better tracking than Hurricanes, but requires ECCM to reliably hit frigates and even some destroyers. It is great for rapidly overwhelming ships and I use tons of them! It pays for that by being much easier to shoot down (to the point where entire salvos of harpoons can't get through good PD, while hurricane submunitions often can), being much shorter ranged, and most crucially having much less ammo/total damage (9k vs 45k).

Hurricane has a somewhat low floor with the recent nerfs (going from 11 to 9 submunitions) and low accuracy without ECCM (with ECCM it is extremely accurate), but it has a high ceiling because it benefits more from ECCM, Racks, and the missile skill/its elite perk The Harpoon's low ammo is its weakness: with racks and the skill it has enough ammo to make a big difference in battles, but will still run out, and while the +50% firing rate is occasionally handy for rapid fire destruction, most of the time the missile is not firing because it lacks opportunity/would just waste itself, so that part of the skill is semi-wasted. The Hurricane has the ammo where the +50% fire rate is extremely valuable, almost like having an extra half weapon.

The Squall vs sabot is in a bit of a similar position: sabots are incredible burst and effective out of the box, but have short range and low ammo, while Squalls need ECCM but have the ammo where with +50% fire rate skill they are just an oppressive level of missiles.
Logged

Daynen

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 356
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #31 on: August 06, 2022, 12:09:06 PM »

I must be one of the few who doesn't favor missiles.  Limited ammo weapons get a VERY scrutinizing eye from me because there's nothing quite as damaging to a fleet doctrine as seeing half your fleet suddenly doing nothing because they're out of missiles.  That said, I don't think I'd mind if most/all small missiles did have larger variants with more tubes, more ammo, whatever.  It seems fine to me that some missiles are only available on bigger mounts.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1900
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #32 on: August 06, 2022, 12:14:17 PM »

I used to think the same but the buff to EMR plus the new Missile spec skill makes even missiles last for a long time. Super potent as well for zero flux.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Amoebka

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 959
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #33 on: August 06, 2022, 12:24:02 PM »

Hurricane isn't used as a strike weapon by the AI. This is more damning than even the lower burst damage. Whenever a enemy overloads, all your ships dump harpoons into it, securing a kill with almost certainty. And they save all ammo specifically for these windows of opportunity. Hurricane is fired on cooldown, meaning when the good opportunity to finish presents itself, most launchers will already be on cooldown after firing into shields. As a result, Hurricane is horrible at actually securing kills. It gets decent damage in a fight overall, but it doesn't instantly remove vulnerable ships, which is highly valuable.
Logged

prav

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #34 on: August 06, 2022, 12:54:58 PM »

The Hurricane was hilariously strong pre-nerf. You'll have to talk pretty fast to convince me it's not still good after the pretty lenient tonedown it got.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 6543
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #35 on: August 06, 2022, 03:37:11 PM »

The Hurricane is still an excellent weapon, yes, its just a different one from the Harpoon.
Logged

Kos135

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #36 on: August 06, 2022, 07:35:38 PM »

What do you guys think about a large version of the proximity launcher though? I've been thinking about it ever since OP brought it up. I think it's an interesting idea, if anything it might be overpowered. What I'm thinking of is basically a Cyclone launcher, but with proximity mines instead of reaper torpedoes. One right after the other with a higher ammo pool than the medium equivalent - 100 base ammo should be fine.

IMO proximity mines (Proximity Launcher/Flash Bomber Wing) are one of the most underestimated ordnance in Starsector.
Logged
You cannot trick an honest man, only a villain will fall for it.

Brainwright

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 276
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #37 on: August 06, 2022, 07:39:48 PM »

The proximity launcher IS good, but I think the Locust outclasses its performance completely.  It's a case where I think two med proximity launchers would do better than a large version almost all the time.
Logged

Kos135

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #38 on: August 06, 2022, 07:50:30 PM »

But the locust functions in a completely different way than the proximity launcher, see my previous post on page 1 of this thread:

Quote
A large version of the proximity launcher would be interesting. I don't think it conflicts with the locust in its PD role, because they perform that role in different ways. Locust missiles seek and destroy fighters, and if there are no fighters they target ships. They're effective against frigates in addition to fighters. Proximity launchers fire mines that are relatively slow, no tracking, but explode when anything gets near them and deal a lot of high explosive damage. Enemy AI is terrified of them and it can be used outside of its PD role in an offensive manner.

The locust can double as an anti-frigate weapon outside of its usual anti-fighter role. The proximity launcher doubles as an anti-cruiser/capital weapon and it can easily destroy incoming torpedoes and salvos of suppressive missiles like annihilators/standard bombs (piranha bomber wing).
« Last Edit: August 06, 2022, 07:52:48 PM by Kos135 »
Logged
You cannot trick an honest man, only a villain will fall for it.

keckles

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #39 on: August 06, 2022, 09:07:48 PM »

I must be one of the few who doesn't favor missiles.  Limited ammo weapons get a VERY scrutinizing eye from me because there's nothing quite as damaging to a fleet doctrine as seeing half your fleet suddenly doing nothing because they're out of missiles.  That said, I don't think I'd mind if most/all small missiles did have larger variants with more tubes, more ammo, whatever.  It seems fine to me that some missiles are only available on bigger mounts.

I used to think the same until I witnessed a Dominator with triple Harpoon MRM Pods wipe several enemy frigates and destroyers in a single salvo. Besides the burst damage they actually can do, the threat of missiles being held in reserve is a distinct advantage that helps prevent the enemy from venting when they might need it most. Though their ammo is limited, their ability to rapidly destroy or disable enemies means you can quickly turn a fight in your favor as opposed to having to slog it out with ballistics or energy weapons alone.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2022, 11:44:00 PM by keckles »
Logged

Kos135

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #40 on: August 06, 2022, 09:28:54 PM »

Lest we forget, the ship itself has a limited time frame in which it can operate. Not just due to peak operating time but also enemy action. You're always on a time limit no matter what weapons you equip, it's a matter of how efficiently you can use that time.
If some cheapo frigate with no officer or built-in hullmods can take out an enemy destroyer with a couple of 1-shot reaper torpedoes, then that frigate has paid for itself more than 2 times over.
Logged
You cannot trick an honest man, only a villain will fall for it.

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1900
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #41 on: August 06, 2022, 11:29:05 PM »

If some cheapo frigate with no officer or built-in hullmods can take out an enemy destroyer with a couple of 1-shot reaper torpedoes, then that frigate has paid for itself more than 2 times over.
I keep seeing this argument in different places but it makes no sense to me. It's not too bad if you're running Hull Restoration, but if I have a ship that dies every fight then I don't want it. Campaign gives you unfair odds in tougher battles and in general you strive to be efficient, if you're losing half a fleet in fight you're doing something very wrong. The only time "ship is worth it if it can kill x DP by itself" makes sense is in a tournament setting. Only when two sides have a completely equal foot can you build ships to be kamikazes.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Kos135

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #42 on: August 07, 2022, 12:42:00 AM »

It's not too bad if you're running Hull Restoration, but if I have a ship that dies every fight then I don't want it.

One Kite costs about 5000-6000 credits, you can find them anywhere and they can fit 2x reapers. Add expanded missile racks and that's 4 reapers. It's 2 DP, doesn't count towards combat ship DP unless you give it militarized subsystems (don't) and it only needs 2 crew members. That's not even a zombie ship, that is literally a throwaway ship. Just think of it as buying 4x reaper torpedoes.
Logged
You cannot trick an honest man, only a villain will fall for it.

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1900
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #43 on: August 07, 2022, 12:46:20 AM »

But for 2 Kites I can have a real frigate that will actually do work.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

BigBrainEnergy

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
    • View Profile
Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?
« Reply #44 on: August 07, 2022, 12:50:02 AM »

But for 2 Kites I can have a real frigate that will actually do work.
Once you get to late game 3 kites will get wasted long before they get in range while an omen or monitor will prove very useful, but are any of the 4 dp frigates really any good after the early game? Just curious, I haven't tried them much yet.
Logged
TL;DR deez nuts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4