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); In-development patch notes for Starsector 0.98a (2/8/25)

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 18

Author Topic: Anubis-class Cruiser  (Read 20354 times)

Ragnarok101

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #195 on: January 04, 2025, 08:56:31 AM »

I kinda want to see what doubling the fighter count and increasing the fire rate and damage of missiles would do, because currently there's no reason to bring a balanced PD-grid option to back up your fleet - even Monitors exist basically to let the AI be stupid at, not to use their flak cannons for something. It might also give the Church a boost since I hear they bring a lot of Converted Hangar builds to the game and letting them carrier spam might be their niche.

Actually, all it really requires is NPC fleets customized in the same way that player missile spam or fighter spam fleets do.  No need to change base values on missiles or fighters, given that missile spam is arguably one of the strongest player fleet archetypes.  It is just auto-fit randomly generated fleets aren't likely to put them all together.  If you ran into a 12 Gryphon fleet with elite missile specialization officers, and linked Squalls and Harpoons, I'm sure you'd find point defense handy.

However, Alex has already commented that he's adding a new end game threat where the Anubis happens to be useful.  Pure coincidence.  :)

So what you're saying is that Alex would need to get NPC fleets to actually work together and have cohesive doctrines. Also a 12-Gryphon fleet is going to stomp everything, I wouldn't take that as proof of anything.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7703
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #196 on: January 04, 2025, 10:19:23 AM »

...

So what you're saying is that Alex would need to get NPC fleets to actually work together and have cohesive doctrines. Also a 12-Gryphon fleet is going to stomp everything, I wouldn't take that as proof of anything.

Partially that, but arguably AI fleets already have cohesive doctrines. The Persian League is a good example of it*. What the AI needs is to "Fire ze missiles!". (Wow I just dated myself.)

The AI is extremely polite to the player in its missile usage. They conserve them and die with fish still in the tubes, instead of spamming the heck out of them and popping player ships. Linking weapon groups together (or even into PD if we want to be evil) is a nasty trick to make the AI fire more of them! Even just taking missiles off of alternating and putting them into a linked group by themselves, so the missiles all fly at once instead of trickling in, would be a difficulty jump.

* While the Persean League has a missile spam doctrine, they use DEMs. Some DEMs aren't bad (small gorgons and medium dragonfires), but DEMs are designed to not spam too hard - they have long refire delays - so the net result is a fleet with good missile endurance but not an overwhelming burst. If the PL used Harpoons in linked groups instead of gorgons, and squalls instead of Hydras, they would be much more of a threat.
Logged

Brainwright

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 752
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #197 on: January 04, 2025, 06:00:00 PM »

Honestly, more buttons to modify general fleet behavior would be cool.  A "weapons free," toggle would be neato for special one off weapons and general missile use.  I'd also be down for a modifier that keeps fighters in close support rather than always sending them out regardless of situation.
Logged

The_Triumvirate

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #198 on: January 05, 2025, 07:14:27 AM »

Does it say anywhere what the deployment point cost will be?

My later game fleets tend to be mixed scarab/omen backed up by 1-2 mid/high tech cruisers and a single Astral or Paragon, so can see this fitting in nicely as is.
Logged
If brute force isn't working, you aren't using enough of it.

Princess of Evil

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 930
  • Balance is not an endpoint, but a direction.
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #199 on: January 05, 2025, 09:06:07 AM »

18 DP
Logged
Proof that you don't need to know any languages to translate, you just need to care.

Üstad

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #200 on: January 05, 2025, 10:32:18 AM »

I kinda want to see what doubling the fighter count and increasing the fire rate and damage of missiles would do, because currently there's no reason to bring a balanced PD-grid option to back up your fleet - even Monitors exist basically to let the AI be stupid at, not to use their flak cannons for something. It might also give the Church a boost since I hear they bring a lot of Converted Hangar builds to the game and letting them carrier spam might be their niche.

Actually, all it really requires is NPC fleets customized in the same way that player missile spam or fighter spam fleets do.  No need to change base values on missiles or fighters, given that missile spam is arguably one of the strongest player fleet archetypes.  It is just auto-fit randomly generated fleets aren't likely to put them all together.  If you ran into a 12 Gryphon fleet with elite missile specialization officers, and linked Squalls and Harpoons, I'm sure you'd find point defense handy.

However, Alex has already commented that he's adding a new end game threat where the Anubis happens to be useful.  Pure coincidence.  :)

(There will definitely be a very different endgame-level threat! And, in fact, one where PD is particularly valuable. I wasn't actively thinking of that when working on the Anubis, though, so that's more of a happy coincidence.)
I think this is the way. Fleets aren't specialized enough and skill system even punishes specialization.
Logged

PixiCode

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 581
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #201 on: January 05, 2025, 02:32:37 PM »

I don’t think the skill system punishes, discourages or encourages fleet specialization. Some of the most powerful fleets are very specialized - the most extreme being missile spam. Are you referring to a full pd-specialized fleet being slow to kill enemies and likely a weak fleet? That’s probably true, but you can still have individual specialized ships that are very impactful in their role for the fleet, too.

The best PD boats are the ones that are simultaneously good at PD and normal offense. Namely Elite point defense Ipdai s-mod builds with needlers, railguns and LACs. Or carriers with some wings that benefit from elite point defense. Xyhpos, Longbow, Wasp, Spark, Talon, Broadsword, Gladius…
« Last Edit: January 05, 2025, 02:38:30 PM by PixiCode »
Logged

eert5rty7u8i9i7u6yrewqdef

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 618
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #202 on: January 07, 2025, 02:52:11 PM »

Spoiler
The second interpreted paragraph meant that in reverse. Not enough buffs to fighters and bombers means they will become even weaker in the incoming patch when PD Lasers of various kinds will get significant buffs
[close]
Understood. Outside of Paladin, I thought PD lasers are just getting a range and OP decrease buff? Fighters tend to stay in range of PD lasers currently, so this shouldn't have any effect on the fighter/PD balance. It will have an effect on Salamanders, but it needed to as it was absurd that two to three PD lasers would reliably fail to shoot down one Salamander, assuming they were mounted on a frigate or destroyer.
I've already said in the thread I made about the Anubis that I feel Paladins are using too little flux and may need a nerf from the proposed change.

Spoiler
In response to third interpreted paragraph, I would like to state that Mercenary carrier fleets are a joke. They are incapable of achieving anything. And are easy prey if it comes to mercenary fleets. Easier even than their phase ship-based fleets. Bombers and fighters on their own will generally get just freaking shredded even by the current incompetent PD grids. And Low Tech will just *** dunk them. Unless your fleet is entirely made of Light Cruisers or Hyperions. Then... Like... Whatever... (though even then bubble shields hard-counter them as well. It takes ages to kill a Radiant with Warthogs for a reason. Even though Radiant is on paper hard-countered by fighters because it has almost no PD)
[close]
They are a joke if you have adequate PD. If you're running a fleet that is light on capitals and heavy on frigates (wolfpack+SD) they can be a problem if you lean towards High-Tech. Phase fleets are in general way more concerning due to near min-maxxed Doom loadouts.

My favorite fleet, SD Nova, I tend to have the least issues with normal Elite Mercenary fleets, and the most with pure carrier spam or Dooms. The reason why is fairly obvious, Novas have 0 PD, a low shield arc even with s-mods to improve it, and have no medium or large offensive turrets to shoot at fighters on the way to a target.
I partially fixed this weakness with Shrike PD escorts and Heron PD support. It's not great but it works okay. The Anubis does both of their jobs better for slightly less DP.

Spoiler
I think a heavily shielded mobile Cruiser with 2 Velociraptors, 2 Guardians and an Autopulse Laser with TEMPORAL SHELL which is the strongest system in the game only restricted because Scarab is generally using comical Mr Bean weapons 9 out of 10 times. Does equal to a ship at value of 30 DP by High Tech standards. Aurora for example is 30 DP... Aurora... 3 Medium energies and a bunch of missiles is 30 DP, cause it has a slightly better Manoeuvring Jets and a bubble shield. This is because it has the mobility of competent kind. Unlike say Dominator. Which doesn't wait for enemies to align. It waits for the planet to turn.

And knowest thou not that Anubis shall be equipped with no less so potent ability to manipulate its non-subjective position in reinterpreted reality?
[close]
You can only achieve that loadout with a level 6 officer and three s-mods, and even then, you're going to be running hot with the AI keeping the Anubis at 80% soft flux and firing in bursts as it can't actually sustain that much flux. Due to how flux heavy the loadout is, the AI will also rarely use its system.
Aurora has way more dissipation at its disposal and doesn't double the flux of energy weapons. Plasma Jets is also flux free. It has 0 missile mounts, everything that isn't energy is synergy. In total is has 2 medium energy, 2 medium synergy, 5 small energy, and 4 small synergy.

Currently, the biggest balance issue the Anubis has is its insane OP budget. 170 OP for an 18 DP High-Tech Cruiser is just nuts. I should probably make a post about that since I forgot to mention it in the thread I made.
Logged

Killer of Fate

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2436
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #203 on: January 07, 2025, 03:31:16 PM »

@eert5rty7u8i9i7u6yrewqdef

if you removed that hullmod, you would probably be able to make a sane Anubis build that has enough firepower to justify 30 DP cost. At least short-termly. And that's what High Tech is usually about. Alpha strike potential.

Having a hullmod that restricts the ship's potency feels like a Midline thing. They were always more about taking compromises. Lacklustre shields (Sunder, Conquest). Poor firepower (Eagle). No PD (Vigilance, Brawler, Hammerhead, Sunder, Gemini, etc.). Bad flux stats (Pegasus, Champion). That's why Sindrian Diktat is a "High Tech" faction that ignores design compromises and just goes for the throat. That's the logic behind the Executor... I think?

I would just make frontal slots on Anubis synergy. Make the two energy slots on the side not fully focus on the middle. Like Omen does for example with its secondary slot. And then just... Let it be a 30 DP Cruiser to support Fury groups. And other High Tech garbage. No need for all this... Complexity. I guess. Simplicity is the spice of sanity. And we are all already insane.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2025, 05:02:36 PM by Killer of Fate »
Logged

Princess of Evil

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 930
  • Balance is not an endpoint, but a direction.
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #204 on: January 08, 2025, 12:58:37 AM »

Which is why i said that Anubis should be midline. It fits in really well with Sunder and Conquest: a ship with far too much theoretical firepower for its own good.
Logged
Proof that you don't need to know any languages to translate, you just need to care.

Killer of Fate

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2436
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #205 on: January 08, 2025, 02:08:40 AM »

Which is why i said that Anubis should be midline. It fits in really well with Sunder and Conquest: a ship with far too much theoretical firepower for its own good.
I dunno if Midline would fit it well. Considering Midline ships would never go into such an extreme as to equip a Cruiser with 3 Energy Weapons. And then tuning it back with a Design Compromises. And then on top of that it has Temporal Shell.
This feels like a crazy weapon made by the Sindrian Diktat. Rather than a High Tech product TT would sell to pretentious idiots like me.
Logged

Princess of Evil

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 930
  • Balance is not an endpoint, but a direction.
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #206 on: January 08, 2025, 02:27:59 AM »

...And Diktat is a "midline ships with HT weapons" faction.
Logged
Proof that you don't need to know any languages to translate, you just need to care.

Killer of Fate

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2436
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #207 on: January 08, 2025, 02:32:43 AM »

...And Diktat is a "midline ships with HT weapons" faction.
Diktat is crazy people. They're the Pathers but in a different path... They make Hammerhead energy-based and spend forty billion morbillion grillions to give Pegasus 0.6 shields. And then ram it into an enemy fleet with Gigacannons. Then ramble about the great leader, who is a skeleton inside a fridge.

They could make Anubis as like "look at us, we can do High Tech too". And then you use it. And it's the most convoluted. Nonsensical design ever created by humanity. And on top of that Temporal Shell is giving everyone on board schizophrenia.

Oh, you meant to agree with me. Yeah...
But I like Anubis being High Tech aesthetic though. Also, on the topic of Diktat. I feel like it'd be fitting for them to have Furies and Shrikes. Afflictors and Shades probably too. And I miss them having Drovers and Conquest. I wouldn't mind Executor being moved only to LG fleets. And then LG ships still appearing in normal Sindrian Diktat setup, except rarely. Also, it'd be neat if they had access to AMBs, if they were using Furies. Furies with AMBs are a vibe.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2025, 02:36:33 AM by Killer of Fate »
Logged

Princess of Evil

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 930
  • Balance is not an endpoint, but a direction.
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #208 on: January 08, 2025, 02:37:02 AM »

It doesn't need to have the High Tech thing to be exactly that - you are literally describing a midline cruiser. Midline cruisers are all about extremes. The only HT cruiser to get a large slot is a *civilian hull*.

And Executor is midline.
Logged
Proof that you don't need to know any languages to translate, you just need to care.

Doctorhealsgood

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 948
    • View Profile
Re: Anubis-class Cruiser
« Reply #209 on: January 08, 2025, 09:42:00 PM »

LG anubis confirmed?
Logged
Quote from: Doctorhealsgood
Sometimes i feel like my brain has been hit by salamanders not gonna lie.
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 18