Print

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

[Sorrydough]

I think it would be nice if the monitor got an adjustment. It tends to trivialize a lot of content - I'm sure you've seen videos of people using a safety overrides monitor to facetank 3 conquests, or a dorito indefinitely with zero support whatsoever.

Something I've noticed about the monitor is that it has 360s of PPT - compared to the average midline frigate PPT of 240 this is... *very high*. I think it should go down to the midline frigate average. In addition to that change, the monitor should have delicate machinery to alleviate safety overrides abuse. I think delicate machinery makes sense in the context of flux shunt. If it's too weak after these changes its DP could be reduced by 1. Overall this would tone down its ability to sit around and be immortal for the entire match.

[Grievous69]

Or you know, fix Safety Overrides in the first place so we don't nerf/change 5-6 ships instead of fixing one problematic hullmod.

I like the PPT nerf tho, didn't even know it was that high since I never use the cheese ship.

[Lawrence Master-blaster]

I think it would be nice if the monitor got an adjustment. It tends to trivialize a lot of content - I'm sure you've seen videos of people using a safety overrides monitor to facetank 3 conquests, or a dorito indefinitely with zero support whatsoever.

Personally I don't consider this a very good argument - it's not like people do this accidentally, if they want to cheese the hell out of the game it's their choice. If you nerfed the Monitor they would do it with a phase ship instead. And outside of the very specific niche of cheesing AI as a flagship(cheesing AI with AI Monitors is a lot harder) the Monitor is already almost completely overshadowed by the Omen in the anti-fighter and anti-missile(and even anti-frigate) role. Nerfing Monitor's PPT would remove one of very fews advantages it still has.

[Grievous69]

I think it would be nice if the monitor got an adjustment. It tends to trivialize a lot of content - I'm sure you've seen videos of people using a safety overrides monitor to facetank 3 conquests, or a dorito indefinitely with zero support whatsoever.

Personally I don't consider this a very good argument - it's not like people do this accidentally, if they want to cheese the hell out of the game it's their choice. If you nerfed the Monitor they would do it with a phase ship instead. And outside of the very specific niche of cheesing AI as a flagship(cheesing AI with AI Monitors is a lot harder) the Monitor is already almost completely overshadowed by the Omen in the anti-fighter and anti-missile(and even anti-frigate) role. Nerfing Monitor's PPT would remove one of very fews advantages it still has.

While I agree with the sentiment of not trying to balance around the player, AI Monitors can still provide so so much help for only 6 DP (I think).

[basileus]

Another alternative would be to replace the Fortress Shield with a Damper Field.

[Pablovansnogger]

Another alternative would be to replace the Fortress Shield with a Damper Field.

I think that would make it useless. Also there is already a frigate with damper field, with a lot more firepower, but still not good.

[CapnHector]

The Monitor is honestly one ship I feel is somewhat bad design. Many players seem to hate it. It exploits the AI's behavior and that is the one feature that makes it threatening. It has no offensive power but can regardless tie up several cruisers only because the cruisers target it instead of actually threatening targets. It is not great to have a ship whose function is to exploit the AI.

A sufficient nerf would be to make the AI do the reasonable thing and just ignore it. Then it would be almost completely useless. Alternatively just delete the ship.

[Rusty Edge]

You could improve general AI to see Monitor as less of a threat.
 Then improve the body-blocking AI and manueverability of the monitor when it is escorting an all. And maybe fine tune it's shields so that they are still impressive without being ridiculous.
 But with the right tweaks the monitor could still be very useful for defending against bombardment and bombing runs without being able to stall an entire enemy fleet.

[Sorrydough]

Or you know, fix Safety Overrides in the first place so we don't nerf/change 5-6 ships instead of fixing one problematic hullmod.

The ship is still overpowered even if safety overrides didn't exist. Coincidentally, its closest relative the centurion, is only good with safety overrides.

[itBeABruhMoment]

I think removing the flux shunt would be a decent fix. Being able to fortress shield indefinitely with basically no consequence is pretty busted.

[Doctorhealsgood]

I think removing the flux shunt would be a decent fix. Being able to fortress shield indefinitely with basically no consequence is pretty busted.

Then what would be the point of the monitor?

[Sorrydough]

I think removing the flux shunt would be a decent fix. Being able to fortress shield indefinitely with basically no consequence is pretty busted.

Then what would be the point of the monitor?

Being a monitor. It's still itself, it just can't sit there forever - it has a time limit set by fortress shield's passive hardflux generation. If the monitors identity is "sit there being immortal for the entire duration of the ship's PPT", then that isn't a desirable identity. Without flux shunt you also have to choose between caps for longer duration, or vents for better uptime. Instead of with flux shunt, where you just max out vents and slap on a distributor and go about your day without putting in any extra thought.

[kenwth81]

I think it would be nice if the monitor got an adjustment. It tends to trivialize a lot of content - I'm sure you've seen videos of people using a safety overrides monitor to facetank 3 conquests, or a dorito indefinitely with zero support whatsoever.

Personally I don't consider this a very good argument - it's not like people do this accidentally, if they want to cheese the hell out of the game it's their choice. If you nerfed the Monitor they would do it with a phase ship instead. And outside of the very specific niche of cheesing AI as a flagship(cheesing AI with AI Monitors is a lot harder) the Monitor is already almost completely overshadowed by the Omen in the anti-fighter and anti-missile(and even anti-frigate) role. Nerfing Monitor's PPT would remove one of very fews advantages it still has.

Why are 3 conquests chasing a monitor? Oh ya because the AI is stupid... It is helpful distraction otherwise nothing more. Phase ships are fast, dangerous and invincible in phase cloak. Able to take down capital ships easily. Why aren't they first on the chopping board?

[Sandor057]

Ah, the same old. Gut it with a machate, eh?
The thing is, as it's built, the Monitor's infamy comes from the AI not being able to recognize it's not able to be a threat. Remove SO and you're just a bit too short to do anything besides absorbing Squall salvos. If anything, an AI redesign would be in order for how hostile Monitors are handled.

[Sorrydough]

Ah, the same old. Gut it with a machate, eh?
The thing is, as it's built, the Monitor's infamy comes from the AI not being able to recognize it's not able to be a threat. Remove SO and you're just a bit too short to do anything besides absorbing Squall salvos. If anything, an AI redesign would be in order for how hostile Monitors are handled.

The problem isn't with the AI having monitors, the problem is the player driving a monitor and shoving it directly into the face of the nearest capital ship. Or ideally, multiple. Something has to give because a monitor should NOT be able to sit in a dorito's face and tank it indefinitely. Changing the AI does not change the fact that a dorito cannot kill a monitor. Changing the AI doesn't change the fact that the monitor has so much PPT that it can outlast nearly every ship in the battle and drain their CR to death at no danger to itself.