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: New music for Galatia Academy (06/12/24)

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10

Author Topic: should we just nerf the Onslaught?  (Read 8449 times)

Nettle

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 659
  • making humorous maneuvers
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #60 on: March 10, 2024, 09:52:43 AM »

How do you think ships are balanced then? Because it sure as hell isn't by how effective they are in AI hands.

I would assume Alex tries to land somewhere in the middle with this. It doesn't make sense to balance all ships solely around the player since you can only ever control one ship at a time and the opposing fleet is all AI, but you also can't overlook outliers that trivialize combat in player hands.
Logged

Lawrence Master-blaster

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 688
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #61 on: March 10, 2024, 10:57:42 AM »

Afflictor, Fury, Retribution, Odyssey, Pegasus, Onslaught and more are all balanced around being AI piloted. Hell Fury is even slightly DP expensive.

If we were to balance ships around the player, battlecruisers would be on average more expensive than battleships. Afflictor and LP Brawlers would be the most expensive frigates in the game. Player Aurora is capital ship tier strong with a player piloting it, same as with Doom which is even more busted. Half of the game's ship should get adjusted DP costs if you ridiculous claim was true.

Aurora is 30DP with cruiser average being 20, Doom is 35, Afflictor is 10 with frigate average being 5. Other ships you listed, other than Onslaught, are almost never actually used as flagships in endgame fleets. I think you're confusing "flagship" with "A ship I like to 1v1 in the sim for fun".
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3012
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #62 on: March 10, 2024, 11:03:24 AM »

Who the hell is talking about endgame flagships, you argued that all ships were balanced around the player. Now you're just blatantly being obtuse by ignoring what I said.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Killer of Fate

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1085
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #63 on: March 10, 2024, 11:17:20 AM »

Who the hell is talking about endgame flagships, you argued that all ships were balanced around the player. Now you're just blatantly being obtuse by ignoring what I said.

They're confused, cause they were talking about AI behaviour and player behaviour. Meanwhile you were talking about player fleet usage and they're talking about flagship usage. Therefore the argument is that Brawler shouldn't be nerfed, cause no one personally pilots Brawlers. Not Brawlers being bla bla bla, cause LP Brawlers are shielded Hounds.

I think that's what's happening here. Otherwise, sorry for being a bad lawyer...
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3012
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #64 on: March 10, 2024, 11:36:44 AM »

But the whole sub topic started because someone claimed Onslaught is too strong when piloted by the player, and the whole thread is about a specific ship. I used other ships as examples because another person said something you can easily tell is not true.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Killer of Fate

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1085
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #65 on: March 10, 2024, 12:00:48 PM »

trying to move on from this unnecessary crucifixion you're trying to incur. I think ships are balanced about the fun factor. The fun of what makes them fun to fight, or what makes them fun to see behave.

The potency of them in player's hand is mostly about it not getting ridiculous. Basically, if people start posting videos of some ship breaking the balance of the game, by showing how you can exhaust the peak operating time by using a hardened subway sandwiches Gremlin to exhaust a Ziggurat. Or spam videos showcasing XIV Onslaughts spamming Mjollnirs, then Fractal will probably go like "okay, this is getting stupid".


And then a some sort of a nerf or a rework will proceed. As long as that doesn't happen. Ships are usually balanced about how they feel when you're fighting them. This is why Ventures and pirate Falcons are rare in their fleets. Cause they're annoying to fight. Because they're both difficult to punish and stupid due to missile spam.

This is why Onslaught, a ship you can easily interact with is 40 dp, and Paragon, Astral, Invictus, ships that are just bricks that stand about and you have to circle and start drilling into are 60 dp and appear from factions that do not fight that much to begin with. This is why Conquests, Executors, Pegasus are more common. Because glass cannons and brawlers are more fun to beat than tanks.

I feel like Fractal dev/devs play/plays a lot of their own game. And they like to enjoy it, unlike most Starsector fans. So, when they design it, they want to limit the stress factor with the exception of Remnants, which are only in predictable locations. And will only be fought if the player chooses to fight them. So, whenever they're ready for a challenge. Starsector is designed kinda like a level select game, even though it's an open world game. With challenges acting in predictable ways. And most of the difficult unpredictable aspects being easily avoidable (note special manoeuvres), and often also being comparatively easy to deal with as long as you're somewhat mediocre at the game.

When players go like "u batman, cause you no defeat Omega mega from the Megaman mod". Throw them down a well for me, cause Starsector is only about challenges if you choose to make it about challenges. More often than not, it's about fun. Because if it's not fun, why bother?

Though, I hope I don't anger you with this somewhat of a derailment. I was just hoping to answer the question of "how is balancing designed?".
« Last Edit: March 10, 2024, 12:24:47 PM by Killer of Fate »
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1896
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #66 on: March 10, 2024, 02:37:23 PM »

but I think 1150 is very much too low given the current state of skills

1150 is the all things equal value. The conquest “only” has 1850 for a similar reason. All other additions tend to be multiplicative. X/Y = x*s/y*s. So I can just use the base option.

It does get a little bit better if you s mod in a distributor but like. That costs an entire S-Mod or even more OP.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7338
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #67 on: March 10, 2024, 02:46:08 PM »

I don't think that is accurate as the largest boosts additive: Distributor and ordinance expertise. And the 5 extra vents is additive as well - I think the only multiplicative is the 10% of base dissipation, so 60 for onslaught and 120 for conquest. In another thread there was an Onslaught with a less extreme build that still had 1643 dissipation.

The critical point is that because the Onslaught is flux limited, all things are not equal on the ships in terms of build priority. On an Onslaught all of the investment of flux can be leveraged into more, good efficiency firepower, while the Conquest is basically maxed out. It can get pushed up to over 2k dissipation without problem, probably close to 2.2k or even higher, but it can't use that very well. The flux argument just really doesn't hold up in this case when it comes to gun firepower.

I'll grant you that the Conquest needs to spend less to get the flux it needs though, and it can use those points for other good things. Either boosting its significantly better missile firepower, shoring up the weak shield, etc.
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1896
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #68 on: March 10, 2024, 03:44:53 PM »

1150 is no ordinance expertise but yes extra 5 vents. Without the 5 extra vents it would be 1150.
Logged

Warnoise

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 206
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #69 on: March 17, 2024, 08:45:51 PM »

There are also videos of 5 astrals taking on 5 ordos, it means they're OP too?
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7338
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #70 on: March 17, 2024, 10:02:47 PM »

I believe the argument you are presenting is a Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_the_undistributed_middle

All overpowered thing kill 5 ordos; Astrals killed 5 ordos; therefor astrals are overpowered.

Is not a logically sound conclusion (it is a formal fallacy even!).



In regards to the particulars of the situation: The difference is what was written about the experience: doing the astrals was extremely difficult and took many attempts even once the 'perfect' loadout was discovered. Meanwhile, iirc, the onslaughts just worked much more easily. As in, take a loadout from some other playing, pop on some beam sunders for fire support, and voila, dead remnants.

So while some ships fall into the "overpowered therefor crushes ordos" category, Astrals fall into the "oh wow, I had to try SO hard to beat ordos" category.
Logged

BigBrainEnergy

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 701
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #71 on: March 17, 2024, 10:29:57 PM »

I believe the argument you are presenting is a Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_the_undistributed_middle

All overpowered thing kill 5 ordos; Astrals killed 5 ordos; therefor astrals are overpowered.

Is not a logically sound conclusion (it is a formal fallacy even!).

Unless I'm missing something here, I think the point they were making is that killing 5 ordos does NOT prove something is overpowered.
Logged
TL;DR deez nuts

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7338
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #72 on: March 17, 2024, 10:50:32 PM »

They might have been, but no one made that argument in the first place that I can find in this thread (either in my memory or in a few quick searces). The only argument made wrt ordos that I'm finding is that the aren't weak because they appear to be performing against ordos at about the same level as other capital ships.

So I decided to take their argument at face value and present the fallacy, because otherwise the post is meaningless.
Logged

Siffrin

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 317
  • Thermal Signature Detected
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #73 on: March 17, 2024, 10:57:34 PM »

Captain Hector is overpowered, he must be nerfed by having Godiva rest on top of his keyboard at random intervals.
Logged
Gods most reckless Odyssey captain.

Demoncard

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« Reply #74 on: March 17, 2024, 11:51:13 PM »

Give it a sick white and purple paint job and some hybrid slots first.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10