Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95a is out! (03/26/21)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

Author Topic: Beam Weapons  (Read 35576 times)

naufrago

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Beam Weapons
« on: June 09, 2013, 06:20:01 PM »

I know beam weapons have been discussed a lot before, but I can't remember everything that was discussed. Apologies if this has been suggested before.

Suggestion: Beam weapons ignore shield efficiency (exception- Fortress Shields)

Beam weapons are great against most fighters and frigates. They pretty much counter phase ships entirely. They deal decent dps to hull and armor, have the best range of all the energy weapons, and they're very efficient. Against ships with inefficient shields and low dissipation, beam weapons can make their victims risk overloads even though they deal soft flux to shields. This is mainly because the flux damage they deal is such a large percentage of the enemy ships' dissipation.  Even against larger ships with inefficient shields, beam weapons can be useful since they significantly reduce the amount of flux available for weapons.

However, they can be worse than useless against high-tech ships. This is due to high-tech's combination of efficient shields, high flux dissipation rate, and high flux capacity. With most beams, they'll be generating more flux in the ship firing than the ship on the receiving end. In addition, the amount of flux they generate is a much smaller percentage of a high-tech ship's dissipation rate, meaning it's even less effective. Against any high-tech ship bigger than a frigate, beams are fairly worthless when compared to the other energy weapons which deal hard flux.

Beams are unique in that they deal soft flux to shields while every other weapon deals hard flux. Soft flux is inherently weaker than hard flux since soft flux damage always has to compete with the enemy ship's dissipation rate. Even if a beam can't overwhelm the enemy's shields on its own, it can still be useful in a support role if it efficiently inhibits the enemy's ability to fire back. Energy weapons that deal hard flux can afford to be inefficient since they'll always force the enemy to drop shields eventually.

So how can you make beams useful against high-tech ships without making them overpowered against low-tech ships? If they ignore shield efficiency, it removes the most significant factor in why they're useless against high-tech ships. You can think of beams dealing soft flux as the tradeoff for ignoring shield efficiency. It makes beam weapons always worth firing since they'll always generate at least as much flux in the ship getting hit as the one firing. High-tech ships still have an advantage with their high flux dissipation, but that's fine. It's actually a slight nerf against low-tech ships, but I think that's also fine.

Some numbers may need to be changed in the interest of balance, but I think it's worthwhile to make beams more generally useful.

Maybe it's fine that beams are useful against low-tech and useless against high-tech, but I think it would be nice if beams were useful against high-tech, too.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2013, 06:35:30 PM by naufrago »
Logged

Reshy

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1046
  • White
    • View Profile
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2013, 08:45:40 PM »

I suggested this before, I was blown off because "You're not supposed to use beams against high-tech ships!!!!!!!!!11" or similar responses.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5279
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2013, 09:30:23 AM »

Well... I can see your point about beams being not as good against high tech ships shields, but I disagree with them being useless. High tech ships tend to have very low armor and high speed and can dodge other weapon types. Beams tend to have both longer range and perfect accuracy - high tech ships can't dodge them and its harder to get out of range, so if they ever lower shields they are in for a good deal of pain. For example, I find that the easiest Sunder build to take on a Medusa is with the High Intensity Laser because the Medusa can't get out of range to vent easily. In a similar vein, I find the easiest way to take out Tempests is to back up a hard flux dealing weapon with beams. You've already pointed out other uses where beams are very superior to pulse/ballistic weapons.

My main problem with this suggestion is that it adds a further complication to beams and makes beams good against everything. Why should beams be good against everything? The ballistic weapons have clear roles which you use them in, so why not the same with beams? If beams were underpowered in general (and I think the HIL and the Phase Beam could use a little buff) then I would support this, but they aren't. As you said, there are things that beams are really good at.
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4281
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2013, 01:21:22 PM »

It's interesting, but I don't think it would work well.
Extra rules for certain ships or weapons are always a complication, but if they are applied entirely behind the scenes they can become really confusing. I don't see an obvious way to communicate that beams ignore shield efficiency, you'd probably never figure it out without reading about it (or sitting there with a calculator).

It would also be somewhat unfair against skill or hullmods that increase shield efficiency.
And beams would be overpowered against high tech frigates.


If a beam buff is needed I'm still in favor of the idea that they pass over allied ships, allowing better fire concentration.
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

Talkie Toaster

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #4 on: June 10, 2013, 02:51:43 PM »

If a beam buff is needed I'm still in favor of the idea that they pass over allied ships, allowing better fire concentration.
This sounds good, and also helps signpost to players that beams work better when concentrated.
Logged

naufrago

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #5 on: June 10, 2013, 06:23:15 PM »

You've already pointed out other uses where beams are very superior to pulse/ballistic weapons.
...
As you said, there are things that beams are really good at.

Erm, when I was highlighting what beams are best at, it was mainly to point out that they're not entirely useless, not that they're better than other weapons. Compared to other energy weapons, they're at best a decent alternative in the roles they're best at. You could argue that they're better at taking out fighters and phase ships, but that's a pretty narrow niche. I'd much rather have a Pulse Laser than a Graviton Beam, or an Autopulse Laser than a HIL, because they're better in nearly all circumstances. Even against fighters and phase ships, pulse weapons take care of them easily too.

If you compare energy weapons to ballistics, energy weapons are flatout worse, but that's okay because that's part of the balance. What I'm trying to do with my suggestion is bring beams closer to the level of other energy weapons by making them more generally useful. They'll still be slightly weaker than other energy weapons due to their lower dps which is dealt as soft flux to shields, but that's the tradeoff for accuracy, range, and efficiency.

And beams would be overpowered against high tech frigates.

How would it make beams OP against high-tech frigates? With their flux stats and speed, darting in and out shouldn't be a huge issue, not to mention they themselves could equip beams. With your logic, how are beams not OP against low-tech frigates? If you argue that it's not OP by bringing up armor, I'd like to remind you that frigate armor is weak and finite. It will get burnt away pretty quickly regardless of what weapon is hitting them. The extra flux venting and capacity of a high-tech frigate still gives it a big edge.

Extra rules for certain ships or weapons are always a complication, but if they are applied entirely behind the scenes they can become really confusing. I don't see an obvious way to communicate that beams ignore shield efficiency, you'd probably never figure it out without reading about it (or sitting there with a calculator).

You know what else is an extra rule with extra complications? Soft flux. It's something unique to beam weapons. They already act differently and need a bit of explanation, so I don't see 'requiring a bit of explanation' as a problem.

..high tech ships can't dodge them and its harder to get out of range, so if they ever lower shields they are in for a good deal of pain.

This is true of low-tech ships, too, but it's not like their armor makes them last longer than a high-tech ship's higher flux venting and capacity would. Shield efficiency being equal, I'd even argue that high-tech ships would last longer under beam pressure.

The ballistic weapons have clear roles which you use them in, so why not the same with beams?

Ballistic weapons actually have roles. You normally fit both kinetic and explosive on a single ship and switch between them when the situation calls for it. With energy weapons, beams are just weaker than pulse weapons. There isn't a single circumstance in the base game I can think of where bringing non-PD beam weapons gives a better result than pulse weapons (or pulse weapons and needlers, when possible). Pulse weapons kill. Beam weapons tickle things to death, eventually, if you have enough of them.

I'd like to emphasize that it's specifically against high-tech ships that beam weapons need a boost in order to become worth equipping. Against low-tech ships, they're fine. They're not meant to kill quickly, and by God do they excel at not killing quickly. =p But it takes a disproportionate amount of beam weapons in your fleet to be useful against high-tech ships compared to low-tech ships.


I think I'm not illustrating the points I'm trying to make well enough. So, let's assume that all shields are equally efficient. Beam weapons would still be more effective against low-tech ships than high-tech ships. When a beam hits shields, it generates soft flux. The soft flux it generates would be a smaller proportion of a high-tech ship's flux dissipation compared to a low-tech ship's flux dissipation. High-tech ships also have more flux capacity, so they can be hit by beams longer than low-tech ships without taking hull or armor damage.

Some scenarios:

[Shield efficiency is respected] Against a Balanced Enforcer, two Graviton Beams will generate 480 flux/s. That generates 120% of its flux dissipation and causes it to build up 160f/s (including shield upkeep cost). After 37.5 seconds, the Enforcer will overload or have to drop shields. Against a Point Defense Medusa, two Graviton Beams will generate 240f/s. That generates 48% of its flux dissipation, slowing its dissipation to 140f/s. It won't overload and can continue firing a bit without risking hull damage or an overload.

[Shield efficiency is ignored] Against a Balanced Enforcer, two Graviton Beams will generate 400f/s. This generates 100% of its flux dissipation and causes it to build up 80f/s. After 75 seconds, the Enforcer will overload or have to drop shields. Against a Close Support Medusa, two Graviton Beams will generate 400f/s. That generates 80% of its flux dissipation, causing it to build up 20f/s. After 380 seconds, the Medusa will overload or have to drop shields.

As you can see, ignoring shield efficiency cuts into the high-tech ship a bit harder, but its flux stats still offset the damage enough that its survivability is comparable to the low-tech ship (especially when you take into account the Medusa's ability to pick its fights). The high-tech ship can even keep firing with its shields up if it can find the opportunity to back off and vent occasionally.

If you're still not happy with that, another suggestion would be to use (shield efficiency + 1)/2 to calculate the damage multiplier. Basically, it would only half-ignore shield efficiency. For example, against a shield with .4 efficiency, it would treat it as though it were .7, and .6 would be treated as though it were .8 efficiency. If you're not happy with abstract calculations in this game, I'd like you to remember how armor works. You could have a throwaway line somewhere, maybe in the tutorial, that explains that shield efficiency is partially ignored by beams.

The Graviton Beam is actually ridiculously efficient against shields and would probably need a nerf with this change. In fact, all the non-PD beams might need a slight efficiency nerf with the change. I'm okay with that if it makes them useful, though.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2013, 06:29:29 PM by naufrago »
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5279
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #6 on: June 10, 2013, 08:38:43 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems you think that beams are just bad compared to other energy weapons (especially against high tech opponents) and need a buff. I think thats for sure true for the graviton and phase beam, maybe a bit for the HIL - a damage boost on both of those would be nice. What I object to is that this suggestion is about making beams "more generally useful" - to me that is the path of boring gameplay because it reduces the consequences of choice. (When I put on beams rather than pulse I want it to be for a definite purpose, not just because I want a little more range/accuracy.) Combine that with a rules complication and I just don't agree.

Slightly off topic so behind a spoiler are several scenarios where as is I use beams rather than pulse weapons. This isn't to say I use JUST beams - a mix with other hard flux dealing weapons is best imo.
Spoiler
Against fighters: this depends a bit on crew level, but pulse lasers (and IR lasers even more so) miss a lot of shots. You end up doing lots more damage at longer ranges for less flux with beams. For many purposes a a graviton beam is worse than a pulse laser, but against fighters they are murder! (They will also deflect Reapers, but thats just a nice bit of silliness.) The Eagle in particular can be an absolute beast of a fighter killer with tacs and gravs (or phase). I think that with the new fighter mechanics this will not at all be a narrow niche at all - quickly killing fighters might be a really good plan.

Point defense: beams are superior in small slots, especially for ships supporting each other. One of the reasons I hate the PD AI is that it makes any IR lasers I do put on a ship target missiles. And miss really really badly. Flak is king, but its also a medium ballistic mount so you're giving up a lot.

Flux efficiency: Probably the biggest reason for me. Several hulls cannot effectively support the pulse weapons. The Wolf for example doesn't really work with a pulse laser (even with +50% OP its a challenge to manage its flux and the AI is bad with it). The midline ships pretty much all fall into this boat: An Eagle with 3 pulses cannot also fire its ballistics for very long. Maybe its worth it to go for that initial damage spike, but I think 2x graviton/phase and 1 pulse (or no pulse at all without the +OP skills) makes for a much more effective ship. This cuts both ways though: a ship with high flux dissipation is most effective when actually using that dissipation. A 2 graviton medusa is a complete waste.... but a graviton + heavy blaster isn't bad.
Probably the epitome of this is the "Disco Paragon" that sometimes comes up. Its not effective against another Paragon, but it can sit under its shield and shred everything smaller all day long because of its efficiency.

HIL on Sunder: The ship is fragile so the range is critical against larger opponents, and the AI is really good with the HIL. I know thats kind of a stupid reason, but the AI can't use Plasma or autopulse for *** on these things.
[close]
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4281
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #7 on: June 11, 2013, 02:05:39 AM »

You know what else is an extra rule with extra complications? Soft flux. It's something unique to beam weapons. They already act differently and need a bit of explanation, so I don't see 'requiring a bit of explanation' as a problem.

You can see that no hard flux is generated by beams if you look at the flux bar. How would you see that shield efficiency is ignored?
Besides, "there is already a complication" is not a good argument to introduce another one.

Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

naufrago

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #8 on: June 11, 2013, 11:17:42 AM »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems you think that beams are just bad compared to other energy weapons (especially against high tech opponents) and need a buff. I think thats for sure true for the graviton and phase beam, maybe a bit for the HIL - a damage boost on both of those would be nice. What I object to is that this suggestion is about making beams "more generally useful" - to me that is the path of boring gameplay because it reduces the consequences of choice. (When I put on beams rather than pulse I want it to be for a definite purpose, not just because I want a little more range/accuracy.) Combine that with a rules complication and I just don't agree.

Slightly off topic so behind a spoiler are several scenarios where as is I use beams rather than pulse weapons. This isn't to say I use JUST beams - a mix with other hard flux dealing weapons is best imo.
Spoiler
Against fighters: this depends a bit on crew level, but pulse lasers (and IR lasers even more so) miss a lot of shots. You end up doing lots more damage at longer ranges for less flux with beams. For many purposes a a graviton beam is worse than a pulse laser, but against fighters they are murder! (They will also deflect Reapers, but thats just a nice bit of silliness.) The Eagle in particular can be an absolute beast of a fighter killer with tacs and gravs (or phase). I think that with the new fighter mechanics this will not at all be a narrow niche at all - quickly killing fighters might be a really good plan.

Point defense: beams are superior in small slots, especially for ships supporting each other. One of the reasons I hate the PD AI is that it makes any IR lasers I do put on a ship target missiles. And miss really really badly. Flak is king, but its also a medium ballistic mount so you're giving up a lot.

Flux efficiency: Probably the biggest reason for me. Several hulls cannot effectively support the pulse weapons. The Wolf for example doesn't really work with a pulse laser (even with +50% OP its a challenge to manage its flux and the AI is bad with it). The midline ships pretty much all fall into this boat: An Eagle with 3 pulses cannot also fire its ballistics for very long. Maybe its worth it to go for that initial damage spike, but I think 2x graviton/phase and 1 pulse (or no pulse at all without the +OP skills) makes for a much more effective ship. This cuts both ways though: a ship with high flux dissipation is most effective when actually using that dissipation. A 2 graviton medusa is a complete waste.... but a graviton + heavy blaster isn't bad.
Probably the epitome of this is the "Disco Paragon" that sometimes comes up. Its not effective against another Paragon, but it can sit under its shield and shred everything smaller all day long because of its efficiency.

HIL on Sunder: The ship is fragile so the range is critical against larger opponents, and the AI is really good with the HIL. I know thats kind of a stupid reason, but the AI can't use Plasma or autopulse for *** on these things.
[close]

Please don't twist the idea into thinking that I'm trying to homogenize things. I'm trying to make beams useful, so that there's an actual decision to be made, not a bad choice and a right choice. You seriously have yet to prove that beams AREN'T terrible against high-tech ships.

The way I see beams, they're the more defensive option. They don't kill fast, but that's fine since they have longer range, higher efficiency, and are meant to fill a support role. Against low-tech ships, they fill their role just fine. Against high-tech ships, they suck miserably at it. They need something to make them at least somewhat worthwhile against high-tech ships without making them too good against low-tech ships.

If you think beams are fine, give me a reason to take beams over the alternatives. 'Fighters' isn't a good enough reason; it's better to get Burst PD for that, and other energy slots are better used on pulse weapons.

I don't count Burst PD as a beam since it works differently than other beams; it doesn't constantly apply pressure and it's less efficient. In my mind, it's categorized as PD, not a beam.

Spoiler
It might help if I mention how I tend to fit my ships, since this is what I've found the most effective strategy to be. Large energy slots get Autopulse lasers. Medium energy slots usually get pulse lasers, rarely heavy blasters. Small energy slots are either left empty, get Burst PD, or occasionally get IR Pulse lasers. Missile slots are left empty or get rockets. Universal slots get needlers, or railguns if I don't have enough OP. Vents get maxed, all ships get stable shields and/or frontal shields if it's an efficient use of OP, all ships get hardened shields, all ships get resistant flux conduits, most ships get integrated targeting unit, some ships get expanded magazines (for needlers and/or burst pd), leftover OP usually goes towards filling small slots with Burst PD or getting capacitors.

Against fighters: Beams are good. The one thing they actually can beat other energy weapons at. The thing is, for small slots I prefer Burst PD over Tac lasers with IPDAI. They're just as good at taking out fighters, but much better at dealing with missiles and rocket swarms (mainly due to tracking). In medium slots, Graviton beams are basically redundant due to me having dedicated PD. HIL doesn't really have the tracking to kill off fighters at much less than max range.

Flux efficiency: Funny that you say a Pulse laser is bad on the Wolf when that's its primary weapon on mine. It seems like the weapon that's most useful in the most circumstances that the AI can handle effectively. Weird how we have completely opposite opinions of it, so I can only assume you're wrong. =p Part of the reason I feel the midline cruisers are so weak is their reliance on beam weapons in their energy slots. On a medusa, AI does better with 2x pulse lasers than grav beam and heavy blaster.
The thing about the disco Paragon is that it's actually better with all pulse weapons, a couple needlers, and a few burst pd. I've tested in a wide number of circumstances (including giant swarm of fighters, the thing the disco paragon should absolutely wreck) and pulse paragon wins.

HIL on Sunder: I've barely ever used the Sunder, so I can't really argue without some tests of my own.
[close]

You know what else is an extra rule with extra complications? Soft flux. It's something unique to beam weapons. They already act differently and need a bit of explanation, so I don't see 'requiring a bit of explanation' as a problem.

You can see that no hard flux is generated by beams if you look at the flux bar. How would you see that shield efficiency is ignored?
Besides, "there is already a complication" is not a good argument to introduce another one.

Much like the difference between soft flux and hard flux, you don't usually notice there's a distinction before someone tells you. Beams need to be explained anyway.

Assume for a second that beams are not fine and need to be buffed against high-tech ships without making them too good against low tech ships. What would you do? Sometimes you have to introduce a new mechanic.



I might have just realized why there's such a disparity in our opinions. You use beams and see that they do a non-negligible amount of damage to the AI. I see the AI use beams against me and see that they're worthless.

I optimize the hell out of my fleet for survivability- AI is often bad at choosing when and where to vent, so minimizing venting time is a priority for me. This means max vents, hardened shields, and efficient weapons (among other things) to minimize the time spent with dropped shields. That has the side benefit of making beams worthless. Not only am I reducing their effectiveness with my shield efficiency, they take a disproportionately smaller amount of my overall flux dissipation because of my vents.

In the most extreme situations, if you manage to get your ally ships' shield efficiency to .33 and max their vents, it's still very possible for weapons that deal hard flux to kill them eventually, but beams will barely tickle. Against a regular Medusa, 3 graviton beams can completely shut it down. Against a player's Medusa, it's an annoyance at worst.

The tipping point is around .5 shield efficiency and 600 dissipation. Once you're beyond that, beams cease to be a threat. The thing is, all high-tech ships bigger than a frigate can achieve that. This would be fine if it came with drawbacks, but it doesn't. I can still kill things quickly, my ships almost never take hull damage unless I'm not paying attention, AND I completely nullify an entire group of weapons.

It's kind of weird now that I think about it, but I'm basically asking for beams to be useful against me. All other weapons present a credible threat that need to be handled correctly, but beams just tickle.
Logged

FloW

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
    • View Profile
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #9 on: June 11, 2013, 11:42:28 AM »

So you are surprised that ships, that are optimized for defense, are immune to weapons, whose disadvantage is (among others) low damage output?
Who would've thought, that something like this is possible? We have to change it, so that all your efforts are in vain!

Advantages of Beams: Impossible to dodge, due to the fact that they hit the moment they're fired; High range; Good Flux/Damage efficiency; Some cause EMP damage;
Disadvantages: Aforementioned low damage; Only Soft Flux, no Hard Flux;

I honestly don't see the problem. They are weapons with advantages and disadvantages. And being capable of consistently sniping fighters at ~ 1000su with an HIL is something that I still haven't managed with any other weapon-type. Beams are just the way they are. Large Ones are excellent for sniping of targets without shields (or at spots where the target has no shields), whereas some of the Mediums are great for reducing the DPS a ship can dish out. And all of them are good for killing fighters.

Again, what's wrong with a highly energy-efficient gun that deals little damage? That's the trade-off. Simple as that.
Logged
"The point is, you see, that there is no point in driving yourself mad trying to stop yourself going mad. You might just as well give in and save your sanity for later.''
- Ford Prefect, creator of the giraffe; a very long time ago

naufrago

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #10 on: June 11, 2013, 11:46:23 AM »

It's not just low dps, the fact that beams have low dps is fine. I'm not arguing that. Beams just do disproportionately low dps against ships with efficient shields compared to other weapons because they also have to contend with the other ship's flux dissipation rate.
Logged

Silver Silence

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 980
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #11 on: June 11, 2013, 11:55:16 AM »

But that's the whole point of having efficient shielding. It gives a ship the ability to outlast an opponent's burst which means they can then unload on their opponent while their opponent stresses over either having to drop shields and take hits, or overload and take more hits.
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4281
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #12 on: June 11, 2013, 12:24:43 PM »

I commend your persistence naufrago :)

It's kind of weird now that I think about it, but I'm basically asking for beams to be useful against me. All other weapons present a credible threat that need to be handled correctly, but beams just tickle.


A question: Have your made your experience with beams in the sandbox in connection with skills? Here you can indeed specialize so much on defense that you become virtually immune to beams. That's not a good base for balancing considerations though, not as long as the AI doesn't get to use (offensive) skills, too.

Without skills I find e.g. the three Gravs of an Eagle quite threatening, also the HIL of a Sunder or the Phase beams of a Xyphos wing.
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

naufrago

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #13 on: June 11, 2013, 03:52:55 PM »

I commend your persistence naufrago :)

A question: Have your made your experience with beams in the sandbox in connection with skills? Here you can indeed specialize so much on defense that you become virtually immune to beams. That's not a good base for balancing considerations though, not as long as the AI doesn't get to use (offensive) skills, too.

Without skills I find e.g. the three Gravs of an Eagle quite threatening, also the HIL of a Sunder or the Phase beams of a Xyphos wing.

It's been like this since before skills. But yes, I've accounted for skills in all my arguments by assuming no skills. To factor out skills, I've either used codex entries, existing variants, or specifically designed ships with skills factored out. Well, I say that, but it's not possible to get Hardened Shields before you have 10 points in Technology and Applied Physics anyway. I've also made sure damage is set to Full, not Half. =p

Funny thing is, maximizing vents and efficiency isn't purely defensive, it provides a lot of offensive utility as well. Having extremely high dissipation means you can run your guns for much longer without having to back off or vent. It lets you stay on the offensive more and apply more constant pressure. If your dissipation is high enough, it's possible to run less efficient, high dps weapons constantly.


You mention the Eagle being threatening at low levels. Try a Medusa with 2x Light needlers, 2x Pulse lasers, 20x vents, and Stabilized shields. You can dump the rest of the OP into whatever you want, just bare in mind that additional non-PD weapons are a bad idea since they'll tax the flux vents too much. Stabilized shields only requires 1 skill point and should be easy to get for even a low level character. Needlers can be hard to find, so Railguns or autocannons are acceptable alternatives in a pinch. Don't expect miracles from the AI if you go with anything other than needlers, though.

Even in the hands of the AI with regular crew, that Medusa can kill the Eagle. How long and how much hull damage it takes depends on how many bad decisions the Medusa's AI makes, but it can kill it. It's pretty simple in the hands of the player. It is a destroyer against a cruiser, though, so it takes a while to kill without any assistance.

That same Medusa is actually good against the Sunder, too. They happen to have very similar loadouts, but the Medusa still wins easily enough, especially in the hands of the player. EDIT: I should mention, that's the most generally deadly, durable loadout for the Medusa I've come up with. Hullmods, skills, and crew bonuses just make it better. If you get two of them, you can fairly easily kill any pirate fleet without taking hull damage. Burst PD takes care of any pesky fighters you can't kill with your other weapons.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2013, 04:36:55 PM by naufrago »
Logged

FlashFrozen

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 988
    • View Profile
Re: Beam Weapons
« Reply #14 on: June 11, 2013, 08:38:34 PM »

I personally am for ignoring shield efficiency, its next to impossible to effectively use it it against high tech ships with their flux dissipation and efficiency together.

But as an alternative, how about how the skill (gunnery implants) that increases energy/ballistic weapon rate of fire by 50% to give beams the ability to do 20-25% hard flux damage as the skill completely ignores beam weapons.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2013, 08:53:19 PM by FlashFrozen »
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10