Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Champion's Lateral Small Energy Mounts  (Read 763 times)

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
    • View Profile
Champion's Lateral Small Energy Mounts
« on: August 20, 2022, 07:06:32 PM »

Preface: I love the Champion. I have been on record saying it is the Platonic Ideal of what a line cruiser should be. I doesn't need buffed, nerfed, or changed in any way...

...except for those silly Small Energies on the side that I have never used. They are an irksome blemish on an otherwise pristine hull.

Problem: The optimal use of the Small Energies on the side is to leave them empty.

The two Small Energies on the side have three strikes against them. 1.) Their firing arcs do not let them contribute to either the main frontal firepower nor do they protect the more vulnerable engines. The rear-most Small Energies already cover the 90% of their arc, so the side mounts are redundant. 2.) They're Small Energies: a topic unto itself but generally perceived to be one of (if not) the worst mounts 3.) Filling them with something actively robs OP/flux that could be better spent somewhere else.

Something like a Burst PD or PD Laser in those mounts aren't bad per se, but because of reason #1, all you're doing is giving token PD to the side of the ship that can't really double-up with the rear Small Energies all the way to the Engine. In a best use-case scenario, side-mounted PD protects the vulnerable flanks from a torpedo or pesky fighters. However, you're spending 14 OP for Burst PD and 8 OP for a single PD Laser that really can't do a lot on its own. Given that other Small Energies will draw even more flux (i.e. IR Pulse) or deal soft flux (Tac Laser) in a way that the forward battery can't help with, the awkward firing arc puts it in a no-man's land for the ship. As they are, leaving them empty seems like the best course of action.

Is there anything wrong with that? No, I suppose, but having mounts that are perpetually unused feels counter-intuitive. They do have a purpose, it's just that purpose doesn't compete very well against the other priorities of the ship.

Solutions:

Allow the firing arc to reach further back toward the engines:

If the side-mounts could "double-up" with the rear-most Small Energies more, I might be more tempted to utilize them to protect the sides/rear of the ship. I still don't know if I would use them for reasons #2 and #3 above. Making them face more forward, in my eyes, is bad since there are already 4 Small Energies up front that can handle PD-duty if necessary. I'm not a big fan of this idea but it's better than the current situation.

Change the mount type:

Things could get interesting here. For the most part, I dismiss out-of-hand changing it to Ballistic, Synergy, Composite or Universal because the ship doesn't have any already. From a hull design standpoint, they just don't fit to me. I suppose Synergy or Universal could work (as they don't take anything away) but that seems a little "extra."

Small Missile: This is the most intriguing as Small Missiles beg to be filled. It creates a bit more meaningful choice overall for the hull, though it would almost certainly have to be a guided missile of some sort. I'm wary about this option, however, because this is a straight-up buff to the Champion. A pair of Sabots, Harpoons, Atropos, etc. all of a sudden give it more flux-free punch. Alternatively, Salamanders or Swarmers give it some utility. The Persean League is also getting a bunch of new Missiles and as the premier line cruiser, it's odd that it wouldn't take advantage of that.

Small Hybrid: Take nothing away but add the option to use Ballistics here. They don't benefit from the ship system, just like the Mediums up front so there's still some choice here. From a ship design perspective, it tracks. That said, I'd take Vulcans over HEF PD Lasers any day. This at least alleviates any additional flux cost since Vulcans cost next to nothing to fire. You could, of course, throw some Kinetics/HE in there but again, the firing arcs don't allow them to contribute to the intended target up front. This is still a buff but not as much as having missiles. One could make the argument to change the Rear Small Energies to Small Hybrids as well for consistency.

Get rid of them:

Why even tempt us? I'm not keen on this option because even though I don't use them, others might. But if they were gone, they wouldn't be an OP-trap.

Overall:

I prefer the Small Missile route but I would understand why that's a bad idea. Technically, it also leaves the flanks even more vulnerable than before because you don't even have the option of putting PD there. That could be more of a feature than a bug, I suppose (i.e. "Champions are weak to being flanked"). If the side mounts were Hybrids, I *might* put Vulcans in there but I might still leave them empty because I prioritize the forward mounts so much more.



« Last Edit: August 20, 2022, 07:08:39 PM by FooF »
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4142
    • View Profile
Re: Champion's Lateral Small Energy Mounts
« Reply #1 on: August 20, 2022, 10:45:35 PM »

Ah yes, the Scarab problem.
I do have to concede that a 25 DP ship has more leeway than an 8 DP one, so I'm not going to advocate for getting rid of those mounts.

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2991
    • View Profile
Re: Champion's Lateral Small Energy Mounts
« Reply #2 on: August 20, 2022, 11:23:00 PM »

I remember a very passionate discussion about this when the patch dropped that included Champion. People were already introduced with the concept with Scarab, and that was obvious how it ended, no more side mounts.

Personally don't mind them nowhere near as much as on Scarab since it's such a bigger ship. For example if I lack Burst PDs, I might 4 put PD lasers in those backside mounts even if all won't focus one area, they'll still help. Or if someone only has Mining Lasers on them. Wouldn't have a problem with changing the mount type, I'm just not feeling it as necessary. Champion already feels like a perfect ship.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

SafariJohn

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3021
    • View Profile
Re: Champion's Lateral Small Energy Mounts
« Reply #3 on: August 21, 2022, 05:28:12 AM »

The very first pictures Alex showed of Champion had the side smalls empty. Pretty telling.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12157
    • View Profile
Re: Champion's Lateral Small Energy Mounts
« Reply #4 on: August 21, 2022, 07:30:30 AM »

I leave the front energy mounts empty on one without s-mods.  I tend to put two burst PD in the rear and leave the remain six small mounts empty.  All those energy mounts would be okay if I use weaker beam PD.

Beam PD less than burst PD need a lot of mounts to be effective.
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
    • View Profile
Re: Champion's Lateral Small Energy Mounts
« Reply #5 on: August 21, 2022, 06:10:30 PM »

The very first pictures Alex showed of Champion had the side smalls empty. Pretty telling.

Ha!

I forgot the Scarab had the same problem and it probably feels it more than the Champion.

I leave the front energy mounts empty on one without s-mods.  I tend to put two burst PD in the rear and leave the remain six small mounts empty.  All those energy mounts would be okay if I use weaker beam PD.

Beam PD less than burst PD need a lot of mounts to be effective.

I think the front Energy Mounts are fine. I routinely fill them because they contribute to the main battery or are an effective PD screen. My flagship currently goes 4x Burst PD (w/Elite PD skill), Plasma Cannon, Ion Pulser, and Heavy MG with a Squall. Expanded Mags helps both the PD and the Ion Pulser and my flux is actually pretty manageable. On other builds, I usually do 2x IR Pulse and 2x Ion Cannon. The only S-mod I have is ITU.
Logged

Schwartz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1453
    • View Profile
Re: Champion's Lateral Small Energy Mounts
« Reply #6 on: August 21, 2022, 07:20:52 PM »

I don't mind them, PD Lasers are cheap and effective, and the two rear mounts almost completely cover the angle of the side mounts, meaning you get 2x PD almost all the way, just shy of the frontal arc. That's fine PD. Just because it misses the last 20° of the engines? The only missiles that consistently try to go for the dead angle on engines are Salamanders, and they aren't the missiles I usually worry about - and they circle around, too.
Logged