Print

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

[kaoseth]

After thinking on this, I think the primary problem with HBL is that it directly completes with the burst laser in the same slot.  It's nearly the same OP and stats, and the art is just the small one scaled up.  However,  If you try to directly buff it and have it cost more, it just becomes a PD version of the phase lance or IR Autolance.   

I think the best option is to replace it entirely with a new energy based PD system that has OP and missile destroying perform half way between flak and double flak:   
 
And to do that, I'd have it chain to a nearby target or two after hitting the first.  This way, you get a unique effect, while still having the the area clear power of a flak, while keeping the single target DPS of the weapon low.
 

[Princess of Evil]

I think the best thing is to disentangle it from PD entirely and just make it a Midline anti-armor weapon at this point.

[FooF]

After thinking on this, I think the primary problem with HBL is that it directly completes with the burst laser in the same slot.  It's nearly the same OP and stats, and the art is just the small one scaled up.  However,  If you try to directly buff it and have it cost more, it just becomes a PD version of the phase lance or IR Autolance.   

I think the best option is to replace it entirely with a new energy based PD system that has OP and missile destroying perform half way between flak and double flak:   
 
And to do that, I'd have it chain to a nearby target or two after hitting the first.  This way, you get a unique effect, while still having the the area clear power of a flak, while keeping the single target DPS of the weapon low.
 

Correct. If the IR Autolance had a PD tag, it would render the HBL completely obsolete. However, if the HBL had some sort of splash effect or hit multiple targets, it would still have a place. I suggested years ago that the HBL should be able to strike multiple targets per burst (up to 3) but I imagine that becomes tricky to implement and might look odd. That said, it’s basically a mini-Paladin at that point and like I said earlier, just downgrading the Paladin to a Medium mount could be interesting in a lot of ways.

[Killer of Fate]

After thinking on this, I think the primary problem with HBL is that it directly completes with the burst laser in the same slot.  It's nearly the same OP and stats, and the art is just the small one scaled up.  However,  If you try to directly buff it and have it cost more, it just becomes a PD version of the phase lance or IR Autolance.   

I think the best option is to replace it entirely with a new energy based PD system that has OP and missile destroying perform half way between flak and double flak:   
 
And to do that, I'd have it chain to a nearby target or two after hitting the first.  This way, you get a unique effect, while still having the the area clear power of a flak, while keeping the single target DPS of the weapon low.
 

Correct. If the IR Autolance had a PD tag, it would render the HBL completely obsolete. However, if the HBL had some sort of splash effect or hit multiple targets, it would still have a place. I suggested years ago that the HBL should be able to strike multiple targets per burst (up to 3) but I imagine that becomes tricky to implement and might look odd. That said, it’s basically a mini-Paladin at that point and like I said earlier, just downgrading the Paladin to a Medium mount could be interesting in a lot of ways.

or you could just acknowledge it being a medium version of a small weapon, kinda like Arbalest vs Railgun sort of thing. And make it cost 7 op with the main price being the sacrifice of a medium weapon slot.

[Lawrence Master-blaster]

Correct. If the IR Autolance had a PD tag, it would render the HBL completely obsolete.

And Tactical Laser with a PD tag would render (LR) PD Laser obsolete. But it doesn't have one so it's a kind of moot point to make.

The main problem with HBL is that high tech ships tend to be medium mount starved(especially when you consider every Composite mount to a Missile mount) which is for example why Heavy Blaster exists - it lets them squeeze more out of the limited amount of mounts they have. So no one would "waste" a medium mount on a purely PD weapon.

It's really the same reason as to why almost no one uses the Paladin - it doesn't matter how good of a PD weapon it is, there isn't a single ship in the game that can "waste" a large energy mount on something that doesn't do damage.

But for medium mounts it's kind of even worse because super cheap offensive options like the Graviton and IR Autolance exist. So even if Alex created some kind of abomination with 10 medium energy mounts, I'd probably just fill them all up with these two and ignore PD completely.

So maybe the real problem is how unimportant PD is in the game, at least when you have a full fleet. You are kind of "expected" to just tank the missiles and fighters get obliterated regardless with sheer volume of fire.

[Killer of Fate]

Correct. If the IR Autolance had a PD tag, it would render the HBL completely obsolete.

And Tactical Laser with a PD tag would render (LR) PD Laser obsolete. But it doesn't have one so it's a kind of moot point to make.

no, it wouldn't. Cause LR PD has better turn rate and way more flux efficiency.

[Princess of Evil]

Also Taclaser wastes a lot of DPS growing the beam out.

[Thaago]

Turn it into a medium mount Vulcan, frag damage and all. No, really, I'm not kidding!

Currently the HBL is operating under the same design restrictions as the small energy PD: because high tech energy pd using ships are (usually) mobile and have good shields, their PD is worse at stopping area saturation missiles, which with a single exception are unguided. Instead, they are better at kiting, with long ranged precision, which is what high tech ships try to do. How a wolf with beam pd deals with a mess of harpoons vs a lasher with vulcans is a good example of the 2 doctrines.

A lot of ships have lots small energies, more than small ballistics. Not many high tech, high mobility ships have spare medium energies though - they are needed for offense. I actually can't think of any except maybe a 1x heavy blaster Medusa (which is arguably just not good). But there are a good number of lower mobility ships that have spare medium energies. Apogee, Eagle (moderately mobile, so maybe doesn't belong), Paragon, Pegasus/Executor, Champion (Ok they are hybrid but still), probably a few more. They could all use some strong anti-area PD options. Arguably 2 of these (Apogee and Paragon) have systems to help deal with this.

Medium ballistic already has flak for "aoe goes boom" point defense in this size category and deserves to keep that unique, so give energy a big old spray of volatile plasma or pulse laser minibolts or... etc. Its not going to make high mobility ships have too good PD because they don't have the slot type to spare, but it would be an interesting option on all the slower or more flux starved ships.

[Princess of Evil]

Iirc Paladin is more or less literally a double flak that deals energy damage on direct hits, so it's more reasonable than it sounds.

[Grievous69]

Turn it into a medium mount Vulcan, frag damage and all. No, really, I'm not kidding!

Currently the HBL is operating under the same design restrictions as the small energy PD: because high tech energy pd using ships are (usually) mobile and have good shields, their PD is worse at stopping area saturation missiles, which with a single exception are unguided. Instead, they are better at kiting, with long ranged precision, which is what high tech ships try to do. How a wolf with beam pd deals with a mess of harpoons vs a lasher with vulcans is a good example of the 2 doctrines.

A lot of ships have lots small energies, more than small ballistics. Not many high tech, high mobility ships have spare medium energies though - they are needed for offense. I actually can't think of any except maybe a 1x heavy blaster Medusa (which is arguably just not good). But there are a good number of lower mobility ships that have spare medium energies. Apogee, Eagle (moderately mobile, so maybe doesn't belong), Paragon, Pegasus/Executor, Champion (Ok they are hybrid but still), probably a few more. They could all use some strong anti-area PD options. Arguably 2 of these (Apogee and Paragon) have systems to help deal with this.

Medium ballistic already has flak for "aoe goes boom" point defense in this size category and deserves to keep that unique, so give energy a big old spray of volatile plasma or pulse laser minibolts or... etc. Its not going to make high mobility ships have too good PD because they don't have the slot type to spare, but it would be an interesting option on all the slower or more flux starved ships.

Excellent idea, I'd be cool to have a spray frag weapon that obliterates missiles and fighters but due to it spewing a bunch of smaller projectiles it won't become a ship melter like Cryoblaster. Although then 600 range might be a bit long, would probably look weird. I'd honestly even try that for AI Furies and Auroras just so that they don't have to worry about missile saturation.

[Lawrence Master-blaster]

no, it wouldn't. Cause LR PD has better turn rate and way more flux efficiency.

Turn rate beyond Fast is basically irrelevant, even if we're talking about shooting fighters already "orbiting" the ship.

And yes, LR PD has better flux efficiency, which is helpful if you have an infinite amount of time to shoot down incoming projectiles. If you don't, I'd prefer 50% more DPS at 25% longer range(which largely mitigates travel time as well) over 33% better flux efficiency. If you really want to argue about flux efficiency of a weapon using 50 flux/second.

[Killer of Fate]

no, it wouldn't. Cause LR PD has better turn rate and way more flux efficiency.

Turn rate beyond Fast is basically irrelevant, even if we're talking about shooting fighters already "orbiting" the ship.

And yes, LR PD has better flux efficiency, which is helpful if you have an infinite amount of time to shoot down incoming projectiles. If you don't, I'd prefer 50% more DPS at 25% longer range(which largely mitigates travel time as well) over 33% better flux efficiency. If you really want to argue about flux efficiency of a weapon using 50 flux/second.

you clearly have never piloted a Wolf. Turn-rate is key when shooting down incoming Salamanders shot at relatively close range. Same with taking down swarming Talons. And lack of flux efficiency in PD can even kill the assault of when using the simplest of tools, such as Pulse Laser.

[Rusty Edge]

Doesn't the LRPD laser actually extend to full range faster than the tactical laser? I remember being frustrated with how long it took tac lasers to reach out and actually start damaging things.

[prav]

Doesn't the LRPD laser actually extend to full range faster than the tactical laser? I remember being frustrated with how long it took tac lasers to reach out and actually start damaging things.

3600 to the taclaser's 2400. On long-ranged capital ships PD-taclaser has a tendency to spend more time extending than actually damaging missiles - especially if it loses the target due to its slow traverse.

[Alex]

Turn it into a medium mount Vulcan, frag damage and all. No, really, I'm not kidding!

Currently the HBL is operating under the same design restrictions as the small energy PD: because high tech energy pd using ships are (usually) mobile and have good shields, their PD is worse at stopping area saturation missiles, which with a single exception are unguided. Instead, they are better at kiting, with long ranged precision, which is what high tech ships try to do. How a wolf with beam pd deals with a mess of harpoons vs a lasher with vulcans is a good example of the 2 doctrines.

A lot of ships have lots small energies, more than small ballistics. Not many high tech, high mobility ships have spare medium energies though - they are needed for offense. I actually can't think of any except maybe a 1x heavy blaster Medusa (which is arguably just not good). But there are a good number of lower mobility ships that have spare medium energies. Apogee, Eagle (moderately mobile, so maybe doesn't belong), Paragon, Pegasus/Executor, Champion (Ok they are hybrid but still), probably a few more. They could all use some strong anti-area PD options. Arguably 2 of these (Apogee and Paragon) have systems to help deal with this.

Medium ballistic already has flak for "aoe goes boom" point defense in this size category and deserves to keep that unique, so give energy a big old spray of volatile plasma or pulse laser minibolts or... etc. Its not going to make high mobility ships have too good PD because they don't have the slot type to spare, but it would be an interesting option on all the slower or more flux starved ships.

This is a neat idea and I really appreciate the reasoning behind it! But at that point, it wouldn't really be a HBL, would it? Feels more like just a different weapon. Hmm.