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 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 22

Author Topic: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic  (Read 17058 times)

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2975
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #195 on: December 09, 2022, 05:44:38 AM »

Yeah you're right about it being 20 DP worth with just the large ballistic change. Did that myself just to see how it works (no other stats modified) and is for sure an interesting thing now. But it just feels so awkward to use. AI can fly almost anything, albeit with performance issues. It just bugs me that the largest gun on the ship is free to target anything, and you have those 2 ballistics as hardpoints on the nose, where turn rate actually matters. So it ends up feeling backwards, like before, only in another way. Oh well, this was a fun little experiment, don't see it happening for real though.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #196 on: December 09, 2022, 06:24:16 AM »

You could always just make the large ballistic a hardpoint. I like the idea of having a large mount on the eagle though.
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #197 on: December 09, 2022, 07:11:59 AM »

Yeah you're right about it being 20 DP worth with just the large ballistic change. Did that myself just to see how it works (no other stats modified) and is for sure an interesting thing now. But it just feels so awkward to use. AI can fly almost anything, albeit with performance issues. It just bugs me that the largest gun on the ship is free to target anything, and you have those 2 ballistics as hardpoints on the nose, where turn rate actually matters. So it ends up feeling backwards, like before, only in another way. Oh well, this was a fun little experiment, don't see it happening for real though.

The only thing I didn’t like was the Large would target fighters more than I cared for. Thing is, the turret recoil is, yet again, more like a feature instead of a bug because something like a HAG becomes pretty inaccurate at range. That’s another balance lever against long range kiting. If it were in a hardpoint, it would have the native recoil halved, not to mention it would lose a lot of its flexibility (and uniqueness). But, if you’re a Hound diving at the Eagle, that Large can still tag you if you on approach, so can the Energies. It makes the Eagle less reliant on facing the enemy but there’s certainly an incentive to do so.

I didn’t find pointing my nose at the target to be that weird. I already have strafe to cursor on so maybe that’s why. The Large is in its own weapon group and so are the hard points but they’re both on auto fire. I let the ship do the targeting and keep my finger on the missiles.
Logged

prav

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #198 on: December 09, 2022, 10:07:34 AM »

I intensely dislike the aesthetics of giving the Eagle a large. The weapon layout is already cool, it just needs the stats to back it up.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7173
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #199 on: December 09, 2022, 11:45:21 AM »

Really interesting read FooF! I admit I was pretty skeptical before about a large ballistic but you make a good case.

I intensely dislike the aesthetics of giving the Eagle a large. The weapon layout is already cool, it just needs the stats to back it up.

Cool yes, but not good/effective... those recessed medium energies on a slow hull are a big problem, and the lack of missiles is a serious handicap compared to other ships that it needs something to make up for!
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #200 on: December 09, 2022, 12:48:22 PM »

Also, just for the record: while I made the large-ballistic-in-center Eagle as a meme, I now unironically thing it's the best solution. It basically solves all of the firepower issues, it has no fitting/flux issues(all the pictures I posted were flux neutral fits with the exception of the last one which was very close, but that was SO), it has no range mismatch issues, it follows from the design of Falcon, it is unique in its own way and it looks cool. What else do you want?

Credit where credit is due! Had BCS not wrote that, I would have dismissed the idea outright but the more I chewed on it, the more it made sense.

Whether or not the change happens, I’m going to mod it in (lol).  I think the biggest knock against the suggestion isn’t the merits/demerits of the idea itself but rather Alex has a better idea for a turreted Large Ballistic cruiser. I believe he said was looking into it when introducing the Manticore.
Logged

SafariJohn

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3010
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #201 on: December 09, 2022, 06:32:12 PM »

Cool yes, but not good/effective... those recessed medium energies on a slow hull are a big problem, and the lack of missiles is a serious handicap compared to other ships that it needs something to make up for!

I'll admit it was only one test, but the Balanced Eagle beat down the sim Eradicator for me ??? Only changes I had going were turn speed and vent speed, which I don't think were relevant. IIRC I issued an Eliminate order once the Eagle had scored ~30% hull damage.
Logged

gG_pilot

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 225
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #202 on: December 10, 2022, 04:06:14 AM »

People here suggests and test weapons or different slots.
Flavour  of the ship should be the main concerns. When you starst with 20 DP there is small range what can ship offers regarding weapons.

I think the better way to add personality to  a  ship is built in modules (looking at  you Apogee) and   ship systems.
Until now, all ships has  exactly one system. Well, I believe it is possible to mount two Systems in one ship, then link them  same as weapons. Which means, there is still one button to  activate The_Ship_System(s).
This spice would offer interesting combinations, without power-creep.

When we talk Falcon,Eagle I  see "hunter type" or "ambush" ship. It should be able posses ship systems which:
- accelerate  AND quick strong   punch
in case of punch down situation "hunter type" could be also called "Frigate killer".  Falcon  & Eagle hunt  rabbits.

So instead of endless variations of (not)adding large slot or  fiddle up and down DP for fine tune, lets bring up an idea  to  add  personality to  make ship different.

Here is an proposal:
Both ships Falcon  & Eagle gets free built in Auxiliary Thrusters
Both ships need to aim by nose, both ships purpose is hunt >> quick change of direction.
Both ships gets double systems >> two linked systems  which activates at once.
Manoeuvring Jets & High energy focus

Get notice, until now, top skill Rockets is (almost) mandatory, and skill Ship System is rarely used. Creating more ships which effectiveness in combat more rely on skill System bring more  variety to pilot builds.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2022, 04:11:19 AM by gG_pilot »
Logged

Lortus

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #203 on: December 10, 2022, 05:07:49 AM »

Quote
That is actually my point.  is there another ship in the game that actually does well with Gravitons as party of it's primary armament as opposed to an afterthought support weapon?

Paragon and Sunder

Quote
Forget all these DP changes and weapon mounts and stuff - just give 0.95.1a Eagle a hullmod that boosts vent rate by like 50% and make it more aggressive about venting. Maybe match its rotation stats to Falcon. You can back away from it easily, sure, but it will reset its flux before your buddy can move in. Riding the edge of when to vent makes it more fun to fly, too.

I think one of the cooler parts of the Eagle is that with certain builds you can vent flux while still firing by not firing your energies. It's pretty basic and just uses the vanilla mechanics but I think that is something that somewhat sets the Eagle apart.

A lot of people are suggesting custom hullmods for the Eagle but I don't think that would work since vanilla almost never does this. And it is usually only done for niche ships, which it seems the Eagle is not meant to be.

Giving it a large slot just seems like it would become a champion derivative which is a bit boring, although it would have a niche of being better than a Champ at long range.

Changing it to all ballistics or all energies also would take away some of the uniqueness of the Eagle/Falcon I think.

A stat boost would not solve the problem entirely but would be quite welcome I think. Mainly boosting flux dissipation and maneuverability would be helpful I think, and also speed. Because they have manjets as a system their base maneuverability is a bit lacking I feel, especially on the Eagle. Increasing the shield efficiency and reducing flux cap could be interesting, to lean into that quickly venting flux idea I mentioned earlier, while not being built of paper like a high tech ship.

Ultimately I think stat changes don't cut it without giving it ridiculous stats and the other changes all take away from the Eagle/Falcon's identity. I think a better idea would be to change it's system to be something less indecisive. Something like a plasma burn would help them out tremendously, and since Low Tech is also getting the Orion Drive, why not let midline join in on the fun too? I think an omnidirectional plasma burn with some correction to where you face, together with some DP changes could turn them around to be a competitive option. Just look at how the Fury is one of if not the best AI ship because it's plasma burn lets it be decisive.
Logged

Blitzm0

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #204 on: December 11, 2022, 07:45:48 PM »


So here's my hot take from the current eagle/falcon situation:
This is my current SO eagle build i cobble up in a minute and a half.With the proposed change Alex is making to the Eagle,this build will have around 1960 dissipation and 20(or maybe 17)DP cost,which is absurd for a supposed "midline" cruiser that can wield heavy blaster more effectively than half of high tech rosters.Just lowering the  deployment cost and increasing the dissipation is not really helping its role as a line cruiser,it's just make it more appealing for the player's inner Pather.The problem with the Eagle(and Falcon to a smaller extent) lies at its mounts,but i don't think the proposed large balistic at the center really is the way to go.Instead,my proposal for change of the current eagles are:
-20 DP without the dissipation buff
-Change the 2 small missiles to 2 small universal for both Eagle and Falcon:those 2 small slot usually the most useless slot on the base eagle/falcon.Most people just abandon it outright for more point on dissipation or slap in missiles for PD(which the eagle is not lacking) or maybe some salamander(which is also not helping cause eagles don't have the finishing power beside SO).Swapping it to universal means you can ultilize it for 2 extra small balistics(or if you're beam connoisseur,2 tac laser) while still keeping it close to the midline theme of versatility in mounts
-Change the central medium energy mount into a hybrid mount:same with the small missiles slot,this will give player the choice to give the eagle more balistic bite while still allow it to mount some suppressing beam if they want to,which also inline with the theme of midline ship with versatile mount

« Last Edit: December 11, 2022, 07:53:51 PM by Blitzm0 »
Logged

llama

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #205 on: December 11, 2022, 07:55:28 PM »

I think you could just as easily point to cruiser SO (or SO in general) being the problem there
« Last Edit: December 11, 2022, 09:57:46 PM by llama »
Logged

Jackundor

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #206 on: December 11, 2022, 10:26:25 PM »

-Change the 2 small missiles to 2 small universal for both Eagle and Falcon:those 2 small slot usually the most useless slot on the base eagle/falcon.Most people just abandon it outright for more point on dissipation or slap in missiles for PD(which the eagle is not lacking) or maybe some salamander(which is also not helping cause eagles don't have the finishing power beside SO).Swapping it to universal means you can ultilize it for 2 extra small balistics(or if you're beam connoisseur,2 tac laser) while still keeping it close to the midline theme of versatility in mounts

bruh what, they are small missiles, missiles are literally the strongest mount type. why would you even consider not using them instead of just putting some sabots

also, they are very far apart and far back so you could hardly ever utilize them with energy or ballistics
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2975
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #207 on: December 12, 2022, 12:28:31 AM »

I think you could just as easily point to cruiser SO (or SO in general) being the problem there
Amen. I hope more poeple catch on how broken and dumb of a hullmod it is, so it eventually gets either reworked or removed. It's not healthy for a discussion that someone goes "just put SO xD, it solves all problems". No it doesn't. And this goes for more ships than just Eagle.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #208 on: December 12, 2022, 09:57:34 AM »

I think you could just as easily point to cruiser SO (or SO in general) being the problem there
Amen. I hope more poeple catch on how broken and dumb of a hullmod it is, so it eventually gets either reworked or removed. It's not healthy for a discussion that someone goes "just put SO xD, it solves all problems". No it doesn't. And this goes for more ships than just Eagle.

I've campaigned repeatedly for SO to be nerfed/fixed/reworked lol, so you're preaching to choir with me.

I've gotten to the point where I just refuse to use it because it makes the game boring.
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: Eagle and (base) Falcon remain anemic
« Reply #209 on: December 12, 2022, 10:24:42 AM »

I think it works for Pathers, though, and I’d hate to lose that wrinkle in the name of balancing it out for the player. I do believe it should only be for Frigates and Destroyers, normally, and on some specialty Cruisers like (P) variants (Falcon, Eradicator, Colossi, etc.)

For balance discussions, though, I ignore it.



Logged
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 22