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: Codex Overhaul (05/11/24)

Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks  (Read 16591 times)

Embolism

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« on: October 10, 2014, 09:10:56 AM »

Conspicuously Absent:



High-Tech Cruiser-Sized Carrier

Given the lore behind the Astral and the variety of powerful, shielded, high-tech strike craft, the lack of a high-tech carrier below capital level is really apparent. A number of missions involving high-tech fleets have to settle for the Gemini, which is midline and not even a dedicated carrier. Gameplay-wise, there is a significant gap between the Astral and the Heron in terms of flight decks, and the Heron's "fast Carrier" designation is somewhat meaningless when the only other carriers are light carriers and the superheavy Astral. A high-tech cruiser with 3 decks is almost desperately needed.



Noticeably Absent:



Phase Destroyer

A destroyer hull seems to provide the perfect mix of firepower and speed phase ships require, yet while there are phase frigates and a phase cruiser, there is no phase destroyer. Not a huge thing but definitely noticeable.


Midline Bomber

While there are a variety of midline heavy fighters with decent anti-ship capability, it simply isn't the same as the sheer alpha-strike potential of bomber wings. Even low-tech fleets have a bomber in the Piranha, midline fleets should too.



Would Be Nice:



Mid-High-Tech Destroyer

By "mid-high-tech" I mean in the same group as the Apogee and the Odyssey: high-tech vessels that still have some of that midline feel. I suppose the Sunder sort-of counts, but its design is more obviously midline than "mid-high-tech". In terms of gameplay, the only high-tech Destroyer at the moment is the Medusa; which is kind of specialised in that it plays rather like a frigate. A more conventional energy-based destroyer wouldn't be out of place.



Midline Interceptor

Interceptors are not that different from heavy fighters, so this isn't really needed: plus there's already the Thunder which is faster than any current interceptor. Still would be nice though.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2014, 11:07:10 AM by Embolism »
Logged

Toxcity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #1 on: October 10, 2014, 09:39:17 AM »

The mod SS+ takes care of some of these: http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=7679.0.

I don't think some of these will be much of a problem in the completed game (such as the high-tech and low-tech carrier) as I'm pretty sure the vanilla factions will have some interlap between what type of tech they use. I do agree that an official Phase-Destroyer would be nice.
Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3805
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #2 on: October 10, 2014, 10:35:24 AM »

For me, the conspicuously absent thing is a mid-tech cruiser with a large ballistic mount and some medium energy mounts - something that actually has the flux stats to use a mjolnir cannon.  If you mount low flux weapons in its medium energy mounts, at least.  Or you could put heavy blasters there and something low flux in the large ballistic slot...
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12190
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #3 on: October 10, 2014, 02:00:57 PM »

New ships I like to see...
  • Fast destroyer-sized combat carrier, preferably high-tech.  (Gemini is a freighter and Condor is a converted Tarsus, a freighter; both are slow, unlike Heron.)
  • Phase destroyer
  • Midline battleship (Conquest is merely a battlecruiser, and is too squishy to trade shots with an Onslaught or Paragon.)
  • Cruiser-sized freighter.  (Buffalo/Tarsus cannot carry enough, and Atlas is too slow)

I like to see alternative epoch skins for various ships that straddle two epochs, such as a blue high-tech skin for the Heron.
Logged

Aeson

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 518
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #4 on: October 10, 2014, 02:30:14 PM »

Midline Bomber

While there are a variety of midline heavy fighters with decent anti-ship capability, it simply isn't the same as the sheer alpha-strike potential of bomber wings. Even low-tech fleets have a bomber, midline fleets should too.
It's my understanding that the current consensus is that the Piranha is a midline bomber, not a low-tech bomber. This is generally supported by the coloration of the non-red portion of the Piranha's hull, which is more similar to the coloration of the Thunder than to the coloration of the Talon and the Mining Pod (more easily seen by examining the sprite in the game data files than by looking at the bomber in game, however), and by the color of its engine exhaust, which doesn't seem quite as red as that of the Talon and the Mining Pod, as well as (more circumstantially) by the description of the Conquest battlecruiser. Given that it's also similar to the Broadsword in coloration, though, I'd be perfectly willing to place Piranhas as either very late low-tech or early midline, particularly as I feel that Conquests are themselves fairly early midline warships.

If I'm not mistaken, the only fighter craft of the low-tech grouping are the Mining Pods, Broadswords, and the Talon Interceptors. The Piranhas, Warthogs, and Thunders all belong to the midline, and the Wasps, Xyphos, Daggers, Tridents, and Longbows all belong to the high-tech. I do agree that it'd be nice to see a bit more evidence of experimentation in the midline fighter craft, as this is when they became popular and when they should perhaps have many odd configurations which were tried and judged not worth pursuing, leading to the more standardized set of fighter craft in the high-tech grouping.

High-Tech Destroyer/Cruiser-Sized Carrier

Given the lore behind the Astral and the variety of powerful, shielded, high-tech strike craft, the lack of a high-tech carrier below capital level is really apparent. A number of missions involving high-tech fleets have to settle for the Gemini, which is midline and not even a dedicated carrier. A high-tech destroyer with 2 decks, or a cruiser with 2/3 decks, is almost desperately needed.
I don't know that this is necessarily problematic. If the fictitious space navies of the Starsector universe parallel real-world navies in their funding allocation, then during peacetime they will most frequently go in for building capital ships rather than the smaller vessels that can more readily be built rapidly should a war come up. Plus, the Heron is already at the edge of being a high-tech carrier with its heavily energy-focused armament and its more rounded and irregular hull shape than the other midline cruisers; paint the hull blue and I'd have been willing to call it a high-tech carrier. There are also some indications that the high-tech line of ships was developed in peacetime, especially with the upcoming rules change that removes hull logistics cost from the supply consumption equation. Lower crew requirements and lower ship upkeep, combined with the use of weapons which might be less effective than the ballistics they replace but which only really require energy from the ship's power plant, are the kinds of trade-offs you might expect to see a navy make when the budget is its greatest enemy, rather than a theoretical or actual hostile nation capable of seriously threatening it. I do agree that the lack of a late midline or early high tech light carrier is a bit problematic, lore-wise, as the Gemini feels like an early midline light carrier which should have been supplanted by a later design, rather unlike the way the Heron feels like a late midline fleet carrier sufficiently modern to work with the high tech lineup. I also agree that it'd be nice to see a little more diversity in the carrier lineup, because while the Heron is a 'fast carrier,' the only things we have to compare it against are the two light carriers, which are equally fast on the main map, and the Astral, which is significantly heavier. It could be nice to get a late midline or early high-tech 3- or maybe 4-deck cruiser level fleet carrier with burn-3, but I don't really feel it's necessary, and it might be problematic to squeeze a 3-deck carrier in that isn't either overshadowed by the Astral and Heron or completely outclasses the Heron. 23.5 logistics for 6 flight decks versus 10.5 logistics for 2; pick something in between there for a 3- or 4-deck carrier, and you have to start wondering if you would have been better off going for the capital carriers or just sticking with the slightly lower number of flight decks granted by the Heron but having space for more fighter wings in your fleet.

Low-Tech Cruiser-Sized Carrier

I get that low-tech fleets aren't supposed to place much emphasis on strike craft, but the only low-tech carrier is the Condor which is a freighter-conversion. Gameplay-wise it does its job just fine, but thematically it seems weird there isn't a dedicated carrier design for low-tech fleets: they still field strike craft, after all.
Personally, I feel that conversions and hybrids are a fairly good fit for low-tech carriers; after all, that's how many early carriers entered service in the real world, as conversions of existing (though often incomplete) ships, or hybrid cruiser-carriers and battleship-carriers (which were often, in the real world, eventually fully converted to carriers, scrapped, or retired due to being inadequate in both roles). It'd be nice to see a bit more experimentation done with it, but on the other hand, low-tech already has both the Condor conversion and the Venture carrier-medium cruiser hybrid (the Venture is in my opinion late low-tech, as despite its coloration, its shape has more in common with the Dominator than with the Eagle, and its basic statistics are likewise more in line with low-tech than with midline cruisers, with relatively poor flux stats, an inefficient shield, a heavy reliance on its armor and innate hull strength, and an armament that is heavily weighted towards ballistics and missiles, though which has started to introduce energy mounts). The Gemini already fits the role of a dedicated early midline light carrier intended to replace the Condor conversions in military service nicely, despite its description indicating that it's a freighter, although it'd be nice to see something a little more durable enter service in the late midline or early high-tech lineups to help emphasize the increasing importance of the fighter and make the high-end carriers a bit more diverse.

Phase Destroyer

A destroyer hull seems to provide the perfect mix of firepower and speed phase ships require, yet while there are phase frigates and a phase cruiser, there is no phase destroyer. Not a huge thing but definitely noticeable.

Mid-High-Tech Destroyer

By "mid-high-tech" I mean in the same group as the Apogee and the Odyssey: high-tech vessels that still have some of that midline feel. I suppose the Sunder sort-of counts, but its design is more obviously midline than "mid-high-tech".
I tend to feel that these two could perhaps be answered by the same ship, though the phase ships do tend to feel like intermediary designs between the early high-tech vessels like the Odyssey and Apogee, and the late high-tech vessels like the Astral and Paragon. I tend to feel that the Sunder seems late enough in the midline grouping to have delayed a replacement design long enough for the replacement to come into service contemporaneously with the phase ships, despite the rather obvious shortcomings of the Sunder's armament (namely, that all the big guns are fixed mounts rather than being turreted). On the other hand, it also seems like phase ships were something that came and went rather rapidly, so perhaps the justification for the lack of a phase destroyer is that one was under development, but the advent of phase cloak-penetrating sensors lead to it being cancelled in favor of the Medusa.

Another possibility would be to create an early high-tech light carrier, thus filling some of the hole left between the Astral and smaller carriers, particularly the light carriers, as the Gemini feels as though it's early midline, and thus likely well on its way to being considered obsolete, at the time of the midline/high-tech transition, whereas the Heron feels more like it's just entering service at that point and can thus be expected to stick around for a while.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2014, 02:36:34 PM by Aeson »
Logged

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2847
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #5 on: October 10, 2014, 03:15:43 PM »

For me, the conspicuously absent thing is a mid-tech cruiser with a large ballistic mount and some medium energy mounts - something that actually has the flux stats to use a mjolnir cannon.  If you mount low flux weapons in its medium energy mounts, at least.  Or you could put heavy blasters there and something low flux in the large ballistic slot...
*coughs* You mean something like this? http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=7676.msg127337#msg127337  The mounts are one large balistic, two medium universals in the front and in the wings, 2 medium energy, 2 small energy, 1 small turrent. Also it is still a work in progress, but if you want to see what I have already, let me know.
Logged
Help out MesoTroniK, a modder in need

2021 is 2020 won
2022 is 2020 too

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #6 on: October 11, 2014, 01:44:55 AM »

wait wait wait....

don't we already have a cruiser sized midline carrier in the Heron class?
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

Aeson

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 518
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #7 on: October 11, 2014, 11:45:51 AM »

wait wait wait....

don't we already have a cruiser sized midline carrier in the Heron class?
Yes, but the request is for a high-tech cruiser-scale carrier, not for just a cruiser-scale carrier. High-tech destroyer/cruiser carrier should be interpreted as high-tech (destroyer or cruiser)-scale carrier or high-tech (destroyer and cruiser)-scale carrier, not as (high-tech destroyer) and cruiser-scale carrier or (high-tech destroyer) or cruiser-scale carrier, nor as (high-tech destroyer-scale carrier) and cruiser-scale carrier or (high-tech destroyer-scale carrier) or cruiser-scale carrier.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2014, 11:52:38 AM by Aeson »
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12190
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #8 on: October 11, 2014, 12:22:20 PM »

Even though Heron is colored like a midline ship, its stats and weapon mounts make it feel more like a high-tech ship... without the obscenely high CR deployment costs.  All the Heron needs to be a high-tech ship is a color swap and maybe laser instead of machine gun drones.
Logged

Aeson

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 518
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #9 on: October 11, 2014, 01:01:41 PM »

Even though Heron is colored like a midline ship, its stats and weapon mounts make it feel more like a high-tech ship... without the obscenely high CR deployment costs.  All the Heron needs to be a high-tech ship is a color swap and maybe laser instead of machine gun drones.
Yes, I do believe that both you and I have already said something to that effect:

Plus, the Heron is already at the edge of being a high-tech carrier with its heavily energy-focused armament and its more rounded and irregular hull shape than the other midline cruisers; paint the hull blue and I'd have been willing to call it a high-tech carrier.
I like to see alternative epoch skins for various ships that straddle two epochs, such as a blue high-tech skin for the Heron.

I was addressing gunnyfreak, who appears to have interpreted the first request made by Embolism as a request for a cruiser-scale carrier, when the request appears to me to have been a request for a high-tech cruiser-scale or destroyer-scale carrier.
Logged

PCCL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • still gunnyfreak
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #10 on: October 11, 2014, 02:12:52 PM »

yeah lol, grammar was never my strong point :P

sorry ;D
Logged
mmm.... tartiflette

Aeson

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 518
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #11 on: October 11, 2014, 03:32:50 PM »

yeah lol, grammar was never my strong point :P

sorry ;D
Don't worry about it. Constructions such as "green eggs and ham" are ambiguous as to whether or not the adjective applies to both nouns, or just to the first noun. Green eggs and green ham, green eggs and ham of normal coloration, and green eggs and ham of unspecified coloration are all valid interpretations of "green eggs and ham." Regarding the high-tech destroyer/cruiser carrier, context allows you to eliminate (high tech destroyer) and (cruiser carrier) as a valid interpretation (although by the rules of English grammar, taking the slash to be an 'and' or an 'or,' this is a valid interpretation) because there's a request specifically for a high-tech destroyer further down the list, but it remains ambiguous as to whether or not it's a (high-tech destroyer carrier) and (cruiser carrier) request or a (high-tech destroyer carrier) and (high-tech cruiser carrier) request. I assume it's the latter because the Heron exists, but under the rules of English grammar, either interpretation is valid.

A further interpretation is that the request for a high-tech destroyer/cruiser carrier is a request for a high-tech carrier at the boundary between the destroyer scale and the cruiser scale, as X/Y is sometimes used to indicate a mix of X and Y.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2014, 03:34:22 PM by Aeson »
Logged

SafariJohn

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3030
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #12 on: October 12, 2014, 08:55:47 AM »

I love English. So much fun to be had with such ambiguity! :D
Logged

Tartiflette

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3529
  • MagicLab discord: https://discord.gg/EVQZaD3naU
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #13 on: October 12, 2014, 02:02:39 PM »

You are looking for a Phase Destroyer ?
Logged
 

Embolism

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks
« Reply #14 on: October 24, 2014, 02:44:06 AM »

A few things.

I consider the Piranha to be a low-tech bomber because its engine style is low-tech. Also red paint is reminiscent of the Lasher.

It's true that factions don't rigidly conform themselves to tech levels, but that's not the point. The point is with the emphasis late-epoch ship designers place on strike craft, logically they would've developed a more easily deployable carrier than the Astral to support them. It could be they didn't bother and just relied on the mid-epoch Heron, but it would be nice to see a 3-deck carrier or a 2-deck destroyer-sized carrier (with high-tech drones, which currently only the Astral uses).

Plus as pointed out, the Heron's fast carrier designation doesn't mean very much when there's no standard carrier to compare it to.

One of the reasons I want to see an Apogee/Odyssey style destroyer is the fact that the only high-tech destroyer is the Medusa, which seems rather specialised (it's almost Frigate-like in how it operates). A more generalist high-tech destroyer would be nice, and since phase ships are even more specialised a phase destroyer wouldn't fulfill this role.

Thinking about it more I agree low-tech doesn't need more carriers. The Condor is perfectly fine. I wouldn't call the Venture a low-tech carrier however, for starters it's not a dedicated carrier and for another it's more of a civilian vessel.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2014, 02:52:59 AM by Embolism »
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3