Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[CapnHector]

The EMR penalty does seem slightly harsh. Let's assume I have a choice to build in Hardened Shields and get no malus, or build in EMR and get a malus, if I understand this correctly.

No officer:
Build in EMR - 50% missile fire rate, +15 OP compared to building in Hardened Shields
With officer and elite missile spec:
Build in EMR - 75% missile fire rate of base, 50% compared to no malus, +15 OP compared to building in Hardened Shields

In each case building in Hardened Shields instead of EMR is equivalent to installing a 15 OP hullmod that gives +100% missile fire rate. This hullmod seems like you would install it on quite a few ships.

It's also slightly odd that the Gryphon specifically is spared from the penalty, when Gryphon is per Vanshilar's simulation testing far and away more powerful than other cruisers: https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=25686.msg383303#msg383303

[Grievous69]

@Alex
Fair enough, you're safe for now.

It's also slightly odd that the Gryphon specifically is spared from the penalty, when Gryphon is per Vanshilar's simulation testing far and away more powerful than other cruisers:

Dear lord I completely forgot about this. The most obvious broken contender gets an easy escape.

[Comrade_Bobinski]

Btw can't believe there's a problem with s-modded EMR and Heavy Armour while SO is still a thing in the game. The single most braindead part of the game.

I tend to agree with you on s-modding sub-bonus/malus but what is your point about SO ?

Edit:

Heavy Armor already has a maneuverability malus baked-in. S-modding adds another debuff? May I ask what it is before overreacting? 

The penalty is a bit higher (25%) and moved entirely to the s-mod effect

And just like that, i'm on with this and not even mad about the S-mod change. Good work Alex !

[SapphireSage]

Going into this then, is there going to be a way to lookup effects of hullmods and their S-mod bonuses and maluses? Currently, as it stands I can codex up the effects of Ship systems, which are already available on their ship card, but can't do the same for hullmods and have to rely on knowing the hullmod at all or having a ship with it built-in to figure what's happening with it and if the S-mod effects are going to potentially be significant I'd like to be aware of what they are going into combat.

[Megas]

I guess fire rate penalty on EMR does not apply to charge regeneration.

On Ziggurat, I use Expanded Missile Rack to increase capacity (to make-up for not getting six AMSRMs and four Resonators), and the main limiter is how fast those Omega missiles recharge (with help from Phase Anchor).  More missiles just means it takes longer before Ziggurat runs out and needs to recharge more missiles.

Ziggurat with human weapons, I s-mod Hardened Subsystems and ITU.  After I find enough Omega tech, I use two respecs to replace s-mod ITU with s-mod EMR for +5 OP.

[Alex]

In each case building in Hardened Shields instead of EMR is equivalent to installing a 15 OP hullmod that gives +100% missile fire rate. This hullmod seems like you would install it on quite a few ships.

Hmm - that makes it seem like it's in the right ballpark, at least, no? That theoretical hullmod needs to be in the "sometimes worth it" category. If it's a no-brainer, then the penalty is too large, and if it's never worthwhile, then the penalty is too small. Still, maybe 33% might be a better number. I'll mess around with it!

It's also slightly odd that the Gryphon specifically is spared from the penalty, when Gryphon is per Vanshilar's simulation testing far and away more powerful than other cruisers: https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=25686.msg383303#msg383303

For an alternative perspective on this: the Gryphon got EMR built-in because it was an absolute no-brainer of a hullmod to put on the ship. And also to then s-mod it in. Now that there are more factors, I wonder if the Gryphon shouldn't lose built-in EMR, and get some ordnance points in exchange - maybe 15 or so. Then you'd have the option of for-OP EMR, or build-in with a penalty; an actual decision to make. (The actual nerf to the ship would be equal to the difference in the OP it gains and the cost of built-in EMR that it would lose.)

Going into this then, is there going to be a way to lookup effects of hullmods and their S-mod bonuses and maluses? Currently, as it stands I can codex up the effects of Ship systems, which are already available on their ship card, but can't do the same for hullmods and have to rely on knowing the hullmod at all or having a ship with it built-in to figure what's happening with it and if the S-mod effects are going to potentially be significant I'd like to be aware of what they are going into combat.

I don't think they're generally significant enough to alter tactics. I'd imagine at some further point you'd be able to look up hullmods in the Codex, probably? Right now the s-mod effect doesn't change the situation very much, if you don't know a hullmod or its effects, you don't know what it does to the enemy ship; the s-mod effect just adds to that and it's not a situation that comes up much, either.

[Grievous69]

Btw can't believe there's a problem with s-modded EMR and Heavy Armour while SO is still a thing in the game. The single most braindead part of the game.

I tend to agree with you on s-modding sub-bonus/malus but what is your point about SO ?

Not specifically a part of the whole topic but it could be one day when it gets reworked.

I find it boring gameplay wise, difficulty concerns come second. So early game, putting SO on your ships is an easy crutch if you're having trouble in fights since the biggest downside (reduced PPT) has zero impact on fights at the start of the game which are short. It removes the zero flux mechanic and enchances your flux so much you now have a supercharged frigate that can solo any other non-SO frigate in the game. Not to mention SO builds are one dimensional, put highest DPS weapons and max flux stats.

Later on it's actually a decision if you want to keep SO on your ships as the fights become longer. But here's the catch, SO snowballs. Single SO ship in big fights won't appear as an obvious problem. But fighting almost a whole fleet of SO ships is another thing. The only fleets in the game that scare me are Luddic Path fleets when I'm still weaker.

I also heavily dislike how it makes for such a nice pick on some high tech ships. Having any sort of ship discussion is tiresome when you get comments "just put SO lmao". Hyperion pretty much demands SO, Scarab and Tempest become even more disgusting. Medusa is too weak and short ranged without it. And lastly, Aurora, which I hate, basically screams "install SO here" when you look at the weapon mounts and stats.

Last time I used the hullmod was probably 2-3 years ago, and I'm having more fun with the game coming up with actual builds, instead of a one trick cheese pony playstyle. Before someone asks "But why does it bother you? It's a single player game." Correct, but I can see how it's not healthy for the game when new players are very often recommended to SO their ships if they're having trouble. Ship and weapon discussions can also fall flat when such a hullmod exists.

[vladokapuh]

Another small thing i want to bring up:
I almost never use those points for anything else than buffing my fleet / officers
Very very very rarely it makes sense to use them for doing "something cool" or story related, i rather just buff my ships and later officers. For me the system is degraded into just grindable fleet buff points, that AI fleets do not even use for the most time, so it creates a bigger gap between me as a player, and most faction fleets.

I think it would feel better overall if we had less base smods, and factions used them a bit too.

[CapnHector]

In each case building in Hardened Shields instead of EMR is equivalent to installing a 15 OP hullmod that gives +100% missile fire rate. This hullmod seems like you would install it on quite a few ships.

Hmm - that makes it seem like it's in the right ballpark, at least, no? That theoretical hullmod needs to be in the "sometimes worth it" category. If it's a no-brainer, then the penalty is too large, and if it's never worthwhile, then the penalty is too small. Still, maybe 33% might be a better number. I'll mess around with it!

You'll probably figure out what is best, but that sounds like a good number.

EMR has a 50% malus - building in a 25 OP hullmod on a capital instead of EMR is equivalent to installing a 15 op hullmod giving +100% rate of fire to missiles.
EMR has a 33% malus - building in a 25 OP hullmod on a capital instead of EMR is equivalent to installing a 15 op hullmod giving +50% rate of fire to missiles.

The former seems more like a no-brainer for any ship that uses missiles. The latter is more interesting, you might want to use it or maybe not. It still seems like a strong hullmod but not as much of a no-brainer.

It's also slightly odd that the Gryphon specifically is spared from the penalty, when Gryphon is per Vanshilar's simulation testing far and away more powerful than other cruisers: https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=25686.msg383303#msg383303

For an alternative perspective on this: the Gryphon got EMR built-in because it was an absolute no-brainer of a hullmod to put on the ship. And also to then s-mod it in. Now that there are more factors, I wonder if the Gryphon shouldn't lose built-in EMR, and get some ordnance points in exchange - maybe 15 or so. Then you'd have the option of for-OP EMR, or build-in with a penalty; an actual decision to make. (The actual nerf to the ship would be equal to the difference in the OP it gains and the cost of built-in EMR that it would lose.)

This sounds good. You could also think about making EMR just give -50% (or -33%) rate of fire for missile weapons in general, S-mod or not. Then it is always an interesting choice for any ship: do I want more sustainable damage, or more burst damage from my missile weapons.

[BCS]

Heavy Armor already has a maneuverability malus baked-in. S-modding adds another debuff? May I ask what it is before overreacting? 

The penalty is a bit higher (25%) and moved entirely to the s-mod effect

Considering that everyone will build in Heavy Armor/Missile Autoloader/EMR regardless, wouldn't it be simpler to just give them a permanent penalty whether they're built-in or not? At least it would be more consistent this way.

[Grievous69]

That's exactly what I asked. And the response is, this system will offer more granularity. A still good choice won't be picked 100% of the time, maybe 80 or 90. And mods that were never built in might see some action. That's how I understood it at least.

[Comrade_Bobinski]

Another small thing i want to bring up:
I almost never use those points for anything else than buffing my fleet / officers
Very very very rarely it makes sense to use them for doing "something cool" or story related, i rather just buff my ships and later officers. For me the system is degraded into just grindable fleet buff points, that AI fleets do not even use for the most time, so it creates a bigger gap between me as a player, and most faction fleets.

I think it would feel better overall if we had less base smods, and factions used them a bit too.

I was like you, and then I started playing in Ironman. It changes the game and the way you value your story point ! It makes every fight more important and the game lasting a lot longer, forcing you to change your fleets after some looses and be careful about colonisation. I think it is the way the game is meant to be play.

[vladokapuh]

Another small thing i want to bring up:
I almost never use those points for anything else than buffing my fleet / officers
Very very very rarely it makes sense to use them for doing "something cool" or story related, i rather just buff my ships and later officers. For me the system is degraded into just grindable fleet buff points, that AI fleets do not even use for the most time, so it creates a bigger gap between me as a player, and most faction fleets.

I think it would feel better overall if we had less base smods, and factions used them a bit too.

I was like you, and then I started playing in Ironman. It changes the game and the way you value your story point ! It makes every fight more important and the game lasting a lot longer, forcing you to change your fleets avec some looses and be careful about colonisation. I think it is the way the game is meant to be play.

Nah, what will change is i play slightly less risky with what i engage, and hold 2SP as backup, and still use all rest of them to buff my fleet / officers
It will make the fleet buffs grind a bit slower, and thats about it

[Inventor Raccoon]

If it's not already in the dev build, giving Dedicated Targeting Core's an s-mod bonus of +5/10% range (so it matches ITU) is a great QoL boon for if you get cruisers earlier on before you find ITU, since it lets you smod in a range bonus without it potentially being a permanent downgrade

[Grievous69]

If it's not already in the dev build, giving Dedicated Targeting Core's an s-mod bonus of +5/10% range (so it matches ITU) is a great QoL boon for if you get cruisers earlier on before you find ITU, since it lets you smod in a range bonus without it potentially being a permanent downgrade

Best idea I've heard all year.