| Author |
[Beta] Cruiser Layout Feedback |
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Raven Warriors
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
|  Posted: 2011-05-01 07:08
As for the SC, I can say that in the right hands and good timing and good situations, it would be an absolute beast. This is a real anti-dreadnaught weapon. Its very fragile, and I wouldn't mind at least one full shield arc an an extra aux gen to boost it, but I wouldn't hope too high for either. An ICC ship without shields is very, very naked.
As an artillery ship, and most of its guns fore, its going to have a hard time keeping range. Thats fine, its a drawback if you're on the move. I just think that having all armor as a protection makes it too much of a glass cannon, it needs an outer layer, which is why just one full arc shield would be enough in my opinon.
In addition, it really is a little too heavy on the energy use. Just a hair. With an extra shield, and an extra aux gen, I think sacrificing the normal rails for both would be an acceptable tradeoff, and make it an excellent long range ship with enough protection to survive at least an initial strike.
I want to however, raise the question of the.. viability of the UGTO Missile Cruiser.
I think UGTO by now has to realize that missiles just don't work for them anymore. ICC has pulse lasers and a pulse shield, KLuth can cloak. Missiles are for all purposes, just something to keep the enemies standard, non-primary armament busy. And not very busy at that.
I'd have to say that it might do well to revise this little bit of combat philosphy among UGTO, and maybe switch it out for a specialty ship of its own, perhaps a flux based cruiser? Such a support vessel would be handy, especially if we started counting ship device damage among Ships Damaged points.
-Ent
_________________
|
Okkam
Marshal
Joined: February 06, 2008
Posts: 157
From: Dorset
| Posted: 2011-05-01 08:16
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-01 00:34, Jim Starluck wrote:
Keep in mind, it is not supposed to get into a dogfight. It's an artillery ship. It should be firing at or near max range and keep its nose pointed towards the enemy. If it underperforms at that role, I may focus its firepower even more strongly forward to give it a greater long-range punch.
This thing is for when Missile Dreads are too big a target, or when their missiles are getting shot down too much.
|
|
Granted, it can be used very well against larger ships but i'm worried about the actual effect of using one in combat.
When flying the ship in the beta server I find immediately that we have a problem with the defence of the ship. The reasoning behind this is that the firepower of this ship is fore (frontal) and yet it only has armour.
Yes the armour is heavier at the front, but what makes ICC good standoff ships is their ability to put all their effort into transfering their shields to the arc that is taking the most flack. With the armour layout of the SC all it takes is one single decent shot to hit the front of the SC and it's basically just a hullboat with some guns. Once the armour is down on the front it cannot risk facing the enemy again unless some sort of projectile were to hit it front on and simply tear through it.
K'luth stations don't have much range but their fighters can make standing off in the distance annoying when you have no way of regenerating your defences.
UGTO stations don't have the range of Ion Cannons, QST aren't that short ranged, but they do have fighters also (which fighters tend to fire before they get close to PD range).
While against stations it could be argued that it can 'out-range' them, it has the issue of not being able to repair the much needed frontal armour.
Now we move onto the dreadnaught scene. If this cruiser were to be used against UGTO you would need some sort of range enhancements to truely abuse the power of the 'artillery' ship as Pcannons aren't exactly short ranged weapons. QSTs can be used the second the dreadnaught gets even close to range (which it will as the ICC ship cannot keep the front aimed while moving to avoid) and as mentioned earlier one good hit from a volley can completely cripple the SC as the armour is paper thin.
Against K'luth it would fairly useless in my opinion. As it can jump like a cruiser it has the ability to e-jump if a K'luth ship decloaks in the aft, however the K'luth dreadnaught Jump Drive recharges about as fast as a human cruiser so you wont be escaping for long.
If the K'luth even get a single close range volley on the SC then it would just crumple in on itself.
The tactics I would assume to be used with the SC would be to sit at 1000gu and shell larger ships, if the enemy get close then e-jump and continue. This can be done with the current setup but I do question the armour instead of shields. It would serve the ship better to remove nearly all the armour, apart from the prow, and then replacing it with shields.
This would mean that it would have a nasty front end when needed but due to moving the shields to the front if anyone got a flank on it then it would be in real trouble.
Atleast if you had shields it would be able to do the primary role of facing the enemy down at range.
_________________
When the universe collapses and dies there will be 3 survivors; Tyr Anasazi, the cockroaches and Dylan Hunt trying to save the cockroaches...
|
Tommas [ USF HunnyBunny ]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: February 04, 2006
Posts: 581
From: Norway
| Posted: 2011-05-01 13:05
Parasite still a problem in my eyes
Low damage and massive energy outage.
Did a duel btw hc and parasite the other day, i where in hc and the parasite didnt almost get hull even.
And for rank, goin for captain to 2nd rear, that would be claw to parasite.
Claw will be the best optional by far, and the outcome will be anohter useless ship in DS.
_________________
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2011-05-01 13:25
Alright, so due to public outcry and preliminary testing, the Strike Cruiser has been re-designed... again. Hopefully, this will be the last time. -_-
This is what will go into the next Beta update:
M-239A Strike Cruiser
The Strike Cruiser is among the final iterations of the M-230 series, with the M-240 hull slated for use in all future cruiser lines. Designed as a heavy tactical support ship, the Strike Cruiser carries three capital-grade ion cannons--weapons normally found only on dreadnoughts and battle stations. These mighty weapons, augmented by several heavy gauss guns, can deliver a punishing amount of long-range firepower. To help provide more power to the weapons it normally carries only Reactive Shields, which can leave it vulnerable to close-range attacks. It is also weaker against attack from the sides and rear, as most of its firepower is concentrated in fixed-forward mounts.
Proposed layout:
- 1x Tachyon Drive
- 3x IE Drive
- 4x Composite Armor (2 F, 1 P, 1 S)
- 4x Reactive Shields
- 2x Full-Arc Chemical Beam Laser
- 2x Dual-Arc Chemical Beam Laser (1 FP, 1 FS)
- 3x Fore-Arc Ion Cannon
- 4x Fore-Arc Heavy Gauss Gun
- 2x Tri-Arc Heavy Gauss Gun (1 FPS, 1 APS)
- 2x Dual-Arc Heavy Gauss Gun (1 AP, 1 AS)
- 2x Auxiliary Fusion Generator
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2011-05-01 13:42
OK, so I tested the first two versions of the SC.
- 5 ICs vs 3 ICs and 8 rails.
The first version would have made an excellent artillery ship, but it was next to defenceless when another cruiser (or below/faster) vessel jumped in. A fully AWM enhanced Kluth dread point jumping it would probably have been fatal.
I guess the 2nd version gave the SC more survivability. The rails did help in close in encounters somewhat. But the heavy armor made it feel like more of a UGTO ship.
I think the 3rd version should be more in line with what an ICC ship should be.
[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo[+R] on 2011-05-01 13:43 ]
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2011-05-01 13:51
That newer layout looks better, reactives standard can easily be switched to active if wanted or left as is for better power management and 2 reactors gives it acceptable power generation for combat maneuvering, it's not going to be going full speed while firing for very long without running out of energy but it shouldn't have to practically sit still either.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
| Posted: 2011-05-01 14:15
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-01 07:08, Enterprise wrote:
I want to however, raise the question of the.. viability of the UGTO Missile Cruiser.
I think UGTO by now has to realize that missiles just don't work for them anymore. ICC has pulse lasers and a pulse shield, KLuth can cloak. Missiles are for all purposes, just something to keep the enemies standard, non-primary armament busy. And not very busy at that.
I'd have to say that it might do well to revise this little bit of combat philosphy among UGTO, and maybe switch it out for a specialty ship of its own, perhaps a flux based cruiser? Such a support vessel would be handy, especially if we started counting ship device damage among Ships Damaged points.
-Ent
|
|
Missiles are best against UGTO. Ironically, Fighters are the best against the carrier faction, again UGTO...
Also, Ent your worries are also found in the missile cruiser's ship description, where their pilots joke that they are only there to keep ICC pd busy and away from the UGTO fighters.
@Snafu (Okkam)
While Pcannons look quite long ranged, remember falloff make them inferior to rails by a long shot at their max range.
_________________
|
Nicon
Marshal
Faster than Light
Joined: October 25, 2010
Posts: 36
| Posted: 2011-05-01 14:28
the new version of SC looks great its well balanced from the looks of it and wont die in 2 alphas. good work.
_________________
HOLY MOTHER OF GOD, PLEASE MAKE YOUR SIGNATURE SMALLER.rn- Pantheon
|
Bardiche
Chief Marshal
Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1247
| Posted: 2011-05-01 15:46
An engineer with a reload drone? Heck, sign me up. Being able to support your fleet by building platforms AND resupplying allies was always the SCB's task. Now you get something that's more mobile to do the same job, albeit less repair drones and more build drones, and no support fire to lend as well.
No sarcasm either. It still doesn't rival the SCB for extended campaigns.
_________________
|
*FTL*Soulless
Marshal
Joined: June 25, 2010
Posts: 787
From: Dres-Kona
| Posted: 2011-05-01 16:36
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-01 15:46, Bardiche wrote:
An engineer with a reload drone? Heck, sign me up. Being able to support your fleet by building platforms AND resupplying allies was always the SCB's task. Now you get something that's more mobile to do the same job, albeit less repair drones and more build drones, and no support fire to lend as well.
No sarcasm either. It still doesn't rival the SCB for extended campaigns.
|
|
only be usefull for scen other than that you should not be near the front lines. The only reason should be that your building plats off in space or repairing a planet...which for that you want more build drones to finish faster before the enemy has a chance to make you in to slag
_________________
We are Back from the shadows.
|
The Fridge
Chief Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: December 13, 2008
Posts: 559
From: In Your Fridge, Eating your Foods.
| Posted: 2011-05-01 17:11
Did a little testing with the new 3rd SC layout.
When using Railguns and Active shields on the SC:
-With the 2 gen's it can fire away happily 7 fore cannon alpha's (no lasers) and lose only 10-15 energy and gain's energy slowly at 20gu/s when not firing.
-With the aux gens turned off and shields on at 20gu/s the ship can do 7 fore cannon alpha's (no lasers) and lose roughly 30 energy.
It trickles energy loss at 20gu/s with 2 less gens when no firing
Conclusion: Since the ship is not meant to be able to dogfight other cruisers, which this could still potentially do when fitted with rails.
Needs the aux gens removed
When fitted with Actives and Guass:
-With the 2 aux gen's it can fire away 7 fore cannon alpha's (no lasers) and lose 35-40 energy and gain's energy slowly at 20gu/s when not firing.
-With 2 aux gen's off it can fire 7 fore cannon alpha's (no lasers) and lose 55 energy and it trickles energy loss at 20gu/s
Conclusion: While the ship cannot dog fight other ships with this set up players can still change to a railgun set up which will give that possibilty + sufficent energy for only 150? less range and less power.
Both set ups could fire at 0 gu without much loss of energy when both aux gens were turned off, when both aux gens where on, there was no energy loss. (Energy back to full before next alpha)
Added note:
-It's heading is now at 16 tops, i'd say for the removal of the aux gens if you add a little armour to reduce the heading value to 15 or as low as possible.
I still think it has too much energy.
The First set up was closest to finshed i feel, all it needed was most of the lasers removed + the AUX gen + a reconfig of the ion arc's and more armour(or shields if it was still good with energy) in there place.
Making it somewhat vunerable to missiles and fighers and close quaters.
While making it too much of a energy hog and heavy in mass to dogfight.
Currently all of this is possible for the SC to do. (Can PD with Pulse)
[ This Message was edited by: The Fridge on 2011-05-01 17:18 ]
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Raven Warriors
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2011-05-01 18:25
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-01 17:11, The Fridge wrote:
Did a little testing with the new 3rd SC layout.
When using Railguns and Active shields on the SC:
-With the 2 gen's it can fire away happily 7 fore cannon alpha's (no lasers) and lose only 10-15 energy and gain's energy slowly at 20gu/s when not firing.
-With the aux gens turned off and shields on at 20gu/s the ship can do 7 fore cannon alpha's (no lasers) and lose roughly 30 energy.
It trickles energy loss at 20gu/s with 2 less gens when no firing
Conclusion: Since the ship is not meant to be able to dogfight other cruisers, which this could still potentially do when fitted with rails.
Needs the aux gens removed
When fitted with Actives and Guass:
-With the 2 aux gen's it can fire away 7 fore cannon alpha's (no lasers) and lose 35-40 energy and gain's energy slowly at 20gu/s when not firing.
-With 2 aux gen's off it can fire 7 fore cannon alpha's (no lasers) and lose 55 energy and it trickles energy loss at 20gu/s
Conclusion: While the ship cannot dog fight other ships with this set up players can still change to a railgun set up which will give that possibilty + sufficent energy for only 150? less range and less power.
Both set ups could fire at 0 gu without much loss of energy when both aux gens were turned off, when both aux gens where on, there was no energy loss. (Energy back to full before next alpha)
Added note:
-It's heading is now at 16 tops, i'd say for the removal of the aux gens if you add a little armour to reduce the heading value to 15 or as low as possible.
I still think it has too much energy.
The First set up was closest to finshed i feel, all it needed was most of the lasers removed + the AUX gen + a reconfig of the ion arc's and more armour(or shields if it was still good with energy) in there place.
Making it somewhat vunerable to missiles and fighers and close quaters.
While making it too much of a energy hog and heavy in mass to dogfight.
Currently all of this is possible for the SC to do. (Can PD with Pulse)
[ This Message was edited by: The Fridge on 2011-05-01 17:18 ]
|
|
Doesn't seem to take into account the drain that occurs when your shields are damaged. After about three alphas at 20gu/sec and all my shields actually recharging, I was down to half energy.
-Ent
_________________
|
The Fridge
Chief Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: December 13, 2008
Posts: 559
From: In Your Fridge, Eating your Foods.
| Posted: 2011-05-01 19:04
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-01 18:25, Enterprise wrote:
Doesn't seem to take into account the drain that occurs when your shields are damaged. After about three alphas at 20gu/sec and all my shields actually recharging, I was down to half energy.
-Ent
|
|
Def mode? Because i was damaged for the 2nd test on 2 arcs, but i redid it and it didn't make much of a difference.
[ This Message was edited by: The Fridge on 2011-05-01 19:48 ]
_________________
|
Leonide
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: October 01, 2005
Posts: 1553
From: Newport News, Virginia
| Posted: 2011-05-01 19:12
so i assume the 4 torpedoes that goes around the ship supposed to immitate the full arc torpedoes?
or am i completely wrong?
_________________
captain of the ICC Assault Cruiser C.S.S. Sledgehammer
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Raven Warriors
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2011-05-02 10:59
Quote:
|
Missiles are best against UGTO. Ironically, Fighters are the best against the carrier faction, again UGTO...
Also, Ent your worries are also found in the missile cruiser's ship description, where their pilots joke that they are only there to keep ICC pd busy and away from the UGTO fighters.
|
|
And which are both valid points. Its interesting to note that fighters are so much better against UGTO because of the way shields work. The PD on any standard ICC ship is so much better than UGTO that any missiles fired don't have a hope of hitting.
Its kind of my point really - the description says it all. I think UGTO deserve a ship thats actually worth using rather than one that whose very description mocks its significance.
I mean, ICC got the Strike Cruiser. I'm definitely not saying give UGTO a similar ship because an artillery ship more embodies ICC ship playstyle. I'm saying that UGTO might be better served by replacing the MC with something more useful. My idea was just to create a ship centered around flux and EMP, but if more creative minds can come up with something better, hey why not. Wasn't the point of all these layout changes to make ships more useful and/or specialized?
-Ent
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
