Print

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

[SteelSoldier]

An idea would be to have a Destroyer have a different buff depending if it is close to a Cruiser/Capital or not, perhaps when they are by themselves without having Cruisers/Capitals nearby they would get something else, this would reinforce their versatility nature.

[Lullabison]

Boost the Shrike's speed. Make it an outright oversize frigate. Increase its DP cost or shield flux/damage numbers if testing shows it needs to be balanced against the increased speed.

Give the Manticore a cruiser or capital targeting core instead of a ballistic rangefinder. Let it be a true sniper gunboat. A Manticore with equivalent range is a choice between guns/DP and more well-rounded capability when you take it over a bigger ship. The Manticore we have is a struggle in build optimization and battle tactics to compensate for its range disadvantage.

The Medusa is . . .probably fine. It's a player ship with a system that the AI struggles to use well. We have several of those.

Make the Enforcer more of a brick. Just a big discount pile of Hull and Armor for its DP cost. A destroyer-sized budget anchor with a burn drive.

Maybe narrow the Hammerhead's shield frontage and up its shield stats to let it credibly tangle with larger ships as long as keeps them directly ahead. And perhaps give the Sunder heavy energy integration or a unique large energy mount to lean into that one big gun. These two are trickier, as a bunch of firepower without the range or speed to safely bring it to bear is an awkward role to fill.

This is all just whiteboarding; I know there's better ideas. But I do think what the destroyer lineup needs is to have their individual roles pushed harder.

[eert5rty7u8i9i7u6yrewqdef]

Really interesting thread!

Once specific idea I've been kicking around is "Escort Package" giving significant speed/maneuverability and range bonuses when near a larger ship (actual details super TBD). And perhaps "Assault Package" giving some tanking or damage bonuses, hmm.

But yeah, for speed, the idea would be that they can rotate in and out of combat more easily when near a larger ship, but can't actually act as a "super frigate" because the speed is tied to proximity to a larger ship. Not entirely sure how well this would work out in practice/how well the AI might handle this, though, hmm.

If you can't make it work with the AI, I have some alternatives for the assault and escort package that allow it to fill the desired roles, but don't require it to be within a certain range of a friendly larger ship.

Escort package: For a reduction in both speed and flux dissipation, the ship gets a combination of the following, i.e. whatever you think is fair.
Higher efficiency shields, more armor and hull, higher active venting rate, and ignores flares.
EP should be all about making the ship tankier so it can stand alongside the ship it is escorting.

Assault package: For the removal of active venting, the ship permanently gains the 0 flux bonus to speed.
That's it, one of the problems with destroyers is they can't back off in time. SO currently fixes this issue, so AP would just be SO without the PPT malus, increase in speed, and flux dissipation boost.
Less interesting but is needed as one of the major reasons SO is used is for its 0 flux boost.

[TheLaughingDead]

Really interesting thread!

Once specific idea I've been kicking around is "Escort Package" giving significant speed/maneuverability and range bonuses when near a larger ship (actual details super TBD). And perhaps "Assault Package" giving some tanking or damage bonuses, hmm.

But yeah, for speed, the idea would be that they can rotate in and out of combat more easily when near a larger ship, but can't actually act as a "super frigate" because the speed is tied to proximity to a larger ship. Not entirely sure how well this would work out in practice/how well the AI might handle this, though, hmm.

If you can't make it work with the AI, I have some alternatives for the assault and escort package that allow it to fill the desired roles, but don't require it to be within a certain range of a friendly larger ship.

Escort package: For a reduction in both speed and flux dissipation, the ship gets a combination of the following, i.e. whatever you think is fair.
Higher efficiency shields, more armor and hull, higher active venting rate, and ignores flares.
EP should be all about making the ship tankier so it can stand alongside the ship it is escorting.

Assault package: For the removal of active venting, the ship permanently gains the 0 flux bonus to speed.
That's it, one of the problems with destroyers is they can't back off in time. SO currently fixes this issue, so AP would just be SO without the PPT malus, increase in speed, and flux dissipation boost.
Less interesting but is needed as one of the major reasons SO is used is for its 0 flux boost.

This is a really interesting idea. A lot of the things mentioned in this thread address how destroyers are inhabiting a somewhat awkward middle ground between frigates and cruisers, but if the individual ships get changed one way or the other, it cuts down on build diversity. Here, destroyers at least maintain a couple different options for if they want to inhabit a more line-battle doctrine, or aim for speed and pulling the enemy fleet apart. I think a range buff for the Escort Package would be important though; part of why destroyers die so often is that they have such a range malus compared to their cruiser brethren. That 20% from ITU makes a big difference in survivability on its own!

Would these hullmods be destroyer-only though? If they are available to cruisers, capitals, and/or frigates, one could see how the destroyer would still be left behind by other size classes speccing into their respective strengths. I don't think destroyer-only hullmods would be entirely without precedent. After all, we have DTC (specific to cruiser/capital), Converted Hangar (specific to non-frigate), SO (specific to non-capital), etc. But the general pattern is that hullmods can be fit on a ship any size X or above/below. There is no precedent for a hullmod that can only be fit to a specific size, and not to those above nor below. Which is one of the reasons why I think Alex considers different buffs for different sizes, so each size can get its own bonus (that may be more or less useful than the other sizes) without restricting the hullmod to a middle size alone.

I just think that, if the bonuses for frigates/cruisers/capitals are good enough, the destroyer still has an awkward place, and if the bonuses are bad enough, why offer the hullmod for other sizes at all? Or maybe the bonuses are more qualitative differences (ie, not just range/speed/health buffs), which could be really interesting, but could also make for one heckin' wacky tooltip! For example, imagine if there was an Escort Package effect where destroyers could split the flux damage they and/or their escort target take between the two ships (or split more ways, with more escorts). That effect is obviously pretty wacky, sounds like a mod effect, and could have some majorly unintended consequences, but by hell would it shake things up and offer some build considerations! Or even something as simple as, "escorting ships gain the officer skills of the ship they escort", however that might be done. And then maybe each size class gets their own bonus, depending on the intended role of the hullmod/ship size.

All this to say, I'd rather have either a destroyer-only hullmod or a hullmod that makes drastic and qualitative changes to gameplay over a new hullmod that ends up granting quantitative effects to all the sizes and still leaving destroyers behind.

[xenoargh]

Part of what affects destroyer viability in vanilla are general game mechanics, such as the arbitrary fleet ship limit pushing you to get the best ship for every slot, the completely trivial economy that makes acquiring and running the most expensive ships a non-issue, the ease of reaching high burn levels even with larger ships and so on.

With all of these issues fixed destroyers regain more of a place, though they still need changes to fulfill a stronger role. In my custom build, mainline destroyers have by far the highest concentrated firepower for their size and have a higher speed advantage over cruisers, making them a source of flanking firepower that is not easily overshadowed by frigates. Not all DDs have these characteristics, the Enforcer remains mostly an escort for larger ships and the Manticore sits as a force multiplier for smaller and faster destroyer fleets for instance - something that is now valued because high burn levels are no longer a given.

^ This. All that.

Plus, I have Destroyers that are meant really specifically to be OP-in-player-hands endgame ships... as mobile, glass-cannon assassins. Because Destroyers really can have a really interesting sweet spot where they get clobbered if deployed as a monofleet against the giant deadly endgame ships, but can offer up cheap-but-deadly support, Frigate-killing and Flux erosion service all the way up to endgame... if there aren't so many things in the game design working against them, starting with their cost-effectiveness vs. something larger. I actually have more problems atm in my private build of Rebal making sure all the Cruisers are passable for what they cost rather than most of the DDs, which is where I feel things should be.

[Sendrien]

I can't remember which game this was from, but I remember how they differentiated ship classes using firing arcs, and I always thought the concept was interesting.

Dreadnoughts were slow and ponderous with extremely powerful broadside potential, but a relatively weaker rear and front allowed smaller and more maneuverable ships to take them down. Dreadnoughts had to be escorted, but shaped the battlefield.
Cruisers were the largest ship class able to operate without escort. They either had good frontal firing arcs, or a powerful broadside and decent speed.
Destroyers had far and away the best frontal attacking firing arcs, and the maneuverability to bring the majority of their firepower to bear in a concentrated strike and then make their escape.
Frigates either had 360 degree defensive configurations to escort Dreads and Cruisers, while others had supportive loadouts to hinder/disable ships, allowing the larger ships in their fleet to take them out.

Perhaps the reason why Destroyers have no niche is because ships of every class seem to have amazing frontal firing arcs.

[eert5rty7u8i9i7u6yrewqdef]

This is a really interesting idea. A lot of the things mentioned in this thread address how destroyers are inhabiting a somewhat awkward middle ground between frigates and cruisers, but if the individual ships get changed one way or the other, it cuts down on build diversity. Here, destroyers at least maintain a couple different options for if they want to inhabit a more line-battle doctrine, or aim for speed and pulling the enemy fleet apart. I think a range buff for the Escort Package would be important though; part of why destroyers die so often is that they have such a range malus compared to their cruiser brethren. That 20% from ITU makes a big difference in survivability on its own!

Would these hullmods be destroyer-only though? If they are available to cruisers, capitals, and/or frigates, one could see how the destroyer would still be left behind by other size classes speccing into their respective strengths. I don't think destroyer-only hullmods would be entirely without precedent. After all, we have DTC (specific to cruiser/capital), Converted Hangar (specific to non-frigate), SO (specific to non-capital), etc. But the general pattern is that hullmods can be fit on a ship any size X or above/below. There is no precedent for a hullmod that can only be fit to a specific size, and not to those above nor below. Which is one of the reasons why I think Alex considers different buffs for different sizes, so each size can get its own bonus (that may be more or less useful than the other sizes) without restricting the hullmod to a middle size alone.

I just think that, if the bonuses for frigates/cruisers/capitals are good enough, the destroyer still has an awkward place, and if the bonuses are bad enough, why offer the hullmod for other sizes at all? Or maybe the bonuses are more qualitative differences (ie, not just range/speed/health buffs), which could be really interesting, but could also make for one heckin' wacky tooltip! For example, imagine if there was an Escort Package effect where destroyers could split the flux damage they and/or their escort target take between the two ships (or split more ways, with more escorts). That effect is obviously pretty wacky, sounds like a mod effect, and could have some majorly unintended consequences, but by hell would it shake things up and offer some build considerations! Or even something as simple as, "escorting ships gain the officer skills of the ship they escort", however that might be done. And then maybe each size class gets their own bonus, depending on the intended role of the hullmod/ship size.

All this to say, I'd rather have either a destroyer-only hullmod or a hullmod that makes drastic and qualitative changes to gameplay over a new hullmod that ends up granting quantitative effects to all the sizes and still leaving destroyers behind.

It would be frigate and destroyer only. Most frigates wouldn't benefit from either hullmod simply due to their nature. High tech frigates don't need to be faster and need active venting so AP is useless for them. Most midline frigates that operate in a supportive role don't need more defenses, but still need their speed and flux dissipation so EP is useless for them.
Where it starts being useful is for low tech frigates, which are in a bad state in terms of the endgame. The defensive bonuses from EP would be useful for escort lashers, and the speed bonuses from AP would be useful for any of the shield-less frigates. The latter would allow them to be competitive vs high tech frigates for capturing points so you can full deploy, and then have them back off until you need them to cap points or dump missiles on an overloaded enemy.

So outside of some niche uses for frigates, it would mainly be used for destroyers. It's also fine lore wise to only allow frigates and destroyers to have this hullmod, as they are the only typical escorts for larger ships. So, the expertise, advice, and practical examples to add these hullmods to larger ships simply does not exist given how rarely anyone would do it.

[itBeABruhMoment]

Really interesting thread!
But yeah, for speed, the idea would be that they can rotate in and out of combat more easily when near a larger ship, but can't actually act as a "super frigate" because the speed is tied to proximity to a larger ship. Not entirely sure how well this would work out in practice/how well the AI might handle this, though, hmm.

If you're willing to stomach the idea of a de facto second ship system, maybe there can be a hullmod that gives a temporary speed boost if flux gets high with something like a 45 second cooldown. This would let destroyers survive being jumped every so often while preventing them from running indefinitely like frigates.

[TheLaughingDead]

It would be frigate and destroyer only. Most frigates wouldn't benefit from either hullmod simply due to their nature. High tech frigates don't need to be faster and need active venting so AP is useless for them. Most midline frigates that operate in a supportive role don't need more defenses, but still need their speed and flux dissipation so EP is useless for them.
Where it starts being useful is for low tech frigates, which are in a bad state in terms of the endgame. The defensive bonuses from EP would be useful for escort lashers, and the speed bonuses from AP would be useful for any of the shield-less frigates. The latter would allow them to be competitive vs high tech frigates for capturing points so you can full deploy, and then have them back off until you need them to cap points or dump missiles on an overloaded enemy.

So outside of some niche uses for frigates, it would mainly be used for destroyers. It's also fine lore wise to only allow frigates and destroyers to have this hullmod, as they are the only typical escorts for larger ships. So, the expertise, advice, and practical examples to add these hullmods to larger ships simply does not exist given how rarely anyone would do it.

Hmm, not sure I agree at all in this case. I feel like high-tech frigates would take AP and midline frigates would take EP precisely because those qualities are the things they already excel at.

For frigates that exist for attacking (for example a Tempest), speed is their greatest asset. It allows these ships to dodge fire, to dart in and out of combat before getting their flux topped out, to stay outside the conjoined arcs and overlapping fighter fields of the enemy fleet. In this regard, more speed is always better. Not being able to vent is a small price to pay for essentially min-maxing in the qualities that these frigates need to be effective (which is why SO can be very effective on them, sometimes moreso than it is on other ships; the not being able to actively vent hardly makes up for the bonuses, and their PPT is low to begin with).

For frigates that exist for defending/escorting (for example a Monitor/Centurion), they don't need speed because they often have qualities that are intended to allow them to survive without it. Not only would they not be able to bring those qualities to bear if they suddenly had the speed to dodge most things, but also they just have little reason to move faster; as frigates, they can keep up with most of the larger ships in the game anyway, and battle lines don't move that fast that they can't keep up. In this regard, more shield efficiency or armour is better (especially considering the further pronounced effects of stacking armour). I can hardly imagine where I would need to give a Monitor speed over even more pronounced shield efficiency. I'd rather give a Centurion an extra block of armour and/or active venting speed than I would give it speed.

So in those two regards, I disagree entirely as to how EP and AP, as you described them, would work. And I disagree with giving them to frigates as well as destroyers, because if frigates can have these benefits just as well as destroyers, this leads back to the question of "what do destroyers have that frigates/cruisers don't?" However, I do agree that both packages would be useful for low-tech frigates, which have always lagged behind. However, I am starting to think low-tech's poor frigate selection is just part of the low-tech 'flavour'; in the same way there shouldn't be an exact copy of each gun up/downsized for every mount, there shouldn't be a 1-to-1 for ships and types of ships between doctrines. Otherwise each ship tech is just a recolouring of each other. It erodes their personalities.

[eert5rty7u8i9i7u6yrewqdef]

Hmm, not sure I agree at all in this case. I feel like high-tech frigates would take AP and midline frigates would take EP precisely because those qualities are the things they already excel at.

For frigates that exist for attacking (for example a Tempest), speed is their greatest asset. It allows these ships to dodge fire, to dart in and out of combat before getting their flux topped out, to stay outside the conjoined arcs and overlapping fighter fields of the enemy fleet. In this regard, more speed is always better. Not being able to vent is a small price to pay for essentially min-maxing in the qualities that these frigates need to be effective (which is why SO can be very effective on them, sometimes moreso than it is on other ships; the not being able to actively vent hardly makes up for the bonuses, and their PPT is low to begin with).

For frigates that exist for defending/escorting (for example a Monitor/Centurion), they don't need speed because they often have qualities that are intended to allow them to survive without it. Not only would they not be able to bring those qualities to bear if they suddenly had the speed to dodge most things, but also they just have little reason to move faster; as frigates, they can keep up with most of the larger ships in the game anyway, and battle lines don't move that fast that they can't keep up. In this regard, more shield efficiency or armour is better (especially considering the further pronounced effects of stacking armour). I can hardly imagine where I would need to give a Monitor speed over even more pronounced shield efficiency. I'd rather give a Centurion an extra block of armour and/or active venting speed than I would give it speed.

So in those two regards, I disagree entirely as to how EP and AP, as you described them, would work. And I disagree with giving them to frigates as well as destroyers, because if frigates can have these benefits just as well as destroyers, this leads back to the question of "what do destroyers have that frigates/cruisers don't?" However, I do agree that both packages would be useful for low-tech frigates, which have always lagged behind. However, I am starting to think low-tech's poor frigate selection is just part of the low-tech 'flavour'; in the same way there shouldn't be an exact copy of each gun up/downsized for every mount, there shouldn't be a 1-to-1 for ships and types of ships between doctrines. Otherwise each ship tech is just a recolouring of each other. It erodes their personalities.

Except the AI rarely dodges fire unless it's missiles. Which means more speed doesn't help past a certain point. You put SO on a tempest for the dissipation so it can mount flux heavier weaponry. If for some reason you wanted a pure speed boost, unstable injector would be the way to go for them. AP on a tempest would decrease its combat time due to needing to passively vent instead of actively vent. It's a 25 vs 50 speed boost, with -15% range or no active venting being the drawbacks. -15% range is nothing given officered tempests will always have gunnery implants thanks to the elite bonus.
The only place it might be a problem on is Scarabs, however the solution is just to make the hullmod expensive, around 5 OP, at which point the Scarab's low OP will prevent its use.

For EP, it would be terrible on the Monitor due to EP's decrease in flux dissipation. The only reason immortal Monitors exist is due to being able to vent flux while using fortress shield, decreasing flux dissipation prevents this ability.
For the same reason it would be bad on the Centurion. The Centurion relies on its system to passively vent hard flux, at the cost of minor armor and hull damage. Decreasing its flux dissipation, decreases how effective its system is, and no bonuses to shield efficiency or hull and armor will help it when it's max flux without charges for its dampener field.

[CapnHector]

It turns out the Medusa is a really fun ship - I have 6 double Heavy Blaster SO ePD builds taking out a single Ordo with no losses, if there are no "jumpscares" present, in an attempt to beat Hiruma Kai's 75 DP double Ordo under AI control challenge - but it is really vulnerable to those "jumpscares" like you guys said. Specifically a Nova or a Radiant with Tachyon Lances will just fry them. This is despite being faster than non-SO frigates, with a mobility system, and 360 shields with sc-front and S-modded extended.

It's kind of unfunny actually. As far as I can tell this is mostly due to the AI being unprepared for the Tachyon Lance mobility combo, which is an old complaint ofc. The Enforcer fleet handles this by well... not caring if a few die, but when you are not spamming ships losses are not as acceptable.

[Lawrence Master-blaster]

Except the AI rarely dodges fire unless it's missiles. Which means more speed doesn't help past a certain point. You put SO on a tempest for the dissipation so it can mount flux heavier weaponry. If for some reason you wanted a pure speed boost, unstable injector would be the way to go for them.

Obviously a frigate with 450 range is not going to dodge anything at that range

[TaLaR]

Except the AI rarely dodges fire unless it's missiles. Which means more speed doesn't help past a certain point. You put SO on a tempest for the dissipation so it can mount flux heavier weaponry. If for some reason you wanted a pure speed boost, unstable injector would be the way to go for them.

Obviously a frigate with 450 range is not going to dodge anything at that range

Some semi-random wiggling and intelligent use of shield (activate only for incoming projectiles you couldn't avoid, DON'T just keep it up) allows to win an otherwise unwinnable fight while dodging most of incoming projectiles. Sure, you take some damage, but you are already piloting an SO build. As long as enemy is dead before PPT runs out, some armor loss is insignificant.

So it's not impossible, it's just something AI doesn't even try to do.

And, Imo, SO Tempest is waste of potential. When player piloted, it can dodge well enough to vent right into the face of enemy ship, as long as no (near) instahit weapons are involved. You can just dump multiple flux bars into single one of enemy, no SO needed.

[stopsquarks]

Maybe narrow the Hammerhead's shield frontage and up its shield stats to let it credibly tangle with larger ships as long as keeps them directly ahead. And perhaps give the Sunder heavy energy integration or a unique large energy mount to lean into that one big gun. These two are trickier, as a bunch of firepower without the range or speed to safely bring it to bear is an awkward role to fill.

This reminds me, I know the game's code as it stands right now probably won't allow anisotropic armor values. But I always thought it would be cool to have a Hammerhead destroyer that has high armor from the frontal aspect only.

[BaBosa]

Maybe narrow the Hammerhead's shield frontage and up its shield stats to let it credibly tangle with larger ships as long as keeps them directly ahead. And perhaps give the Sunder heavy energy integration or a unique large energy mount to lean into that one big gun. These two are trickier, as a bunch of firepower without the range or speed to safely bring it to bear is an awkward role to fill.

This reminds me, I know the game's code as it stands right now probably won't allow anisotropic armor values. But I always thought it would be cool to have a Hammerhead destroyer that has high armor from the frontal aspect only.

There is a mod somewhere that adds a hullmod that doubles front armour and halves armour on the back so that sort of thing is possible.