| Author |
Stations, what are they good for? |
Starcommander
Marshal
Joined: December 14, 2005
Posts: 579
From: In your base, stealing your cookies
|  Posted: 2010-05-11 01:42
Notice how most of the people complaining about stations are those that CAN'T fly them? I too was one who thought stations are really OP, then I started flying one.....god am I happy they have what little firepower they have now. Issue I seem to run into the most is armor. Stations don't move much and there JD takes a good 3min to recharge so they don't jump often.
You find the core weps on 2 dread types and the stations, that's the ONLY places you find them. There is a reason there on the stations, its the ONLY defensive non missile, non beam weapon they have! On the Combat Dreads and Assault Dreads there on there to complement the guns that those ships have or in the case of the AD its the only ranged gun other then 2 pea shooters. The Sector Command Base Stations core weps are (again) the ONLY defensive weapon it has, and if you say fighters are for defending it then you have no use playing this game.
Giving stations a 4k or the 2k gu across dico would greatly give them a lot of survivability as it would force people to move in on them slowly, also would give the stations a protection bubble. The dico could only be turned on when your not moving, you also would want it this way anyways as moving makes you lose energy anyways (well at least for ICC it dose). Not only for them to protect themselves but also for the fleet they are supporting. Doing this would call for the need of only a few stations, 3-4 at the most and the rest of the people in dreads or cruisers. Not a station cap mind you as you could have several fleets doing this at a time, attacking multiple locations at once. This would become more apparent as the MV starts merging into a single unified F2 map.
Also Kluth stations need some armor boosting of there own, as it is those things are quiet useless in combat. Maybe make a Kluth station SI type wep? One with a 1k gu range? Maybe do this for all factions and have a station type core wep, one that is got more range to it to compensate for the inability to move much less "chase" down your target.
Would people still station spam? Yes but it wouldn't be all that effective as it would have no other ships to support them. With a repair drone limit in combat (as I have said before) doing more then 4 stations becomes quite useless.
_________________
WH 40k armies, Grey Knights, Dark Angles, Imperial Guard (Vostroyan First Born) and Orks.
There is a thin line between knowing when to give up and when to try harder.
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-05-11 02:05
With stations having dictors, you could space them at 700 gus aparts in a square formation and effectively block out a substantial area of space.
I still think it's a bad idea. As I said, stations are not OP. But station spamming is.
Get that difference in your head.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Eledore Massis [R33]
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: May 26, 2002
Posts: 2694
From: tsohlacoLocalhost
| Posted: 2010-05-11 02:41
Quote:
| On 2010-05-11 01:42, Starcommand of ICC wrote:
Notice how most of the people complaining about stations are those that CAN'T fly them? |
|
Indeed starcommand, i have wonderd this to.
But for the same reason you won't see me joining the discussion here,
While i know how they handel and what there capable off (and what not), i don't have actuall MV combat experience in them.
_________________
DS Discordion
|
Glaceon
Fleet Admiral
Joined: January 08, 2010
Posts: 141
| Posted: 2010-05-11 10:57
fine if u want a small ship that people use just get a scout slap on a few core weps and a few PD and there happy lol jk
i say stations are fine now their JD takes long easy to ambush but what does suck when they WH to the dicter field and drop infs why not make the cargo of the stations like 7 or 8 so trannsports are realy transports and stations arent just a better slower moveing more armored transport with WH for anti dicter and the repear drone is fine well IMHO cause we still can damage ugto stations at close range....
_________________
|
Starcommander
Marshal
Joined: December 14, 2005
Posts: 579
From: In your base, stealing your cookies
| Posted: 2010-05-11 14:11
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-11 10:57, Mal2103 {R33} wrote:
fine if u want a small ship that people use just get a scout slap on a few core weps and a few PD and there happy lol jk
i say stations are fine now their JD takes long easy to ambush but what does suck when they WH to the dicter field and drop infs why not make the cargo of the stations like 7 or 8 so trannsports are realy transports and stations arent just a better slower moveing more armored transport with WH for anti dicter and the repear drone is fine well IMHO cause we still can damage ugto stations at close range....
|
|
For the same reason that they are slow that they have such a cargo capacity. There sitting ducks for cloak dropping or other ship capping "tactics". In fact I would buff them to have a 20 cargo cap like the SCB ships so they can hold both a lot of INF and Res to build plats.
_________________
WH 40k armies, Grey Knights, Dark Angles, Imperial Guard (Vostroyan First Born) and Orks.
There is a thin line between knowing when to give up and when to try harder.
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-05-11 20:55
LOL. 20 slots for inf.
U guys really want to station rush planets don't you?
*rolleyes*
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Great Budda
Fleet Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: January 01, 2008
Posts: 157
From: Omaha, NE
| Posted: 2010-05-11 21:40
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-11 20:55, Kenny_Naboo wrote:
LOL. 20 slots for inf.
U guys really want to station rush planets don't you?
*rolleyes*
|
|
Actually that's not a bad idea and kind of falls in line with the inherent thought of intended station uses. A station could be used as a remote point for troop staging for an invasion. That way a transport would not have to jump from planet to planet to collect infantry but jump to the station to load and back enroute to the target planet. I do agree that stations (or dreads not designed in a drop ship manner) should not be able to drop infantry on a planet… that’s a transports function. I say increase the number of infantry that can be loaded on a station. I say let them carry 30 infantry and take away their ability to direct drop onto planets.
Would that appease your thoughts Kenny?
_________________
|
Aeraesoria
Admiral
Synchronicity
Joined: October 25, 2007
Posts: 49
From: Aeraesoria
| Posted: 2010-05-11 22:02
That's actually a good idea O_o and I like it... would also make capturing a station very... very hard as you would have to tranny rush that station with troops to overwhelm the troops on board and also get past the defenses in the ship
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-05-11 22:32
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-11 21:40, Great Budda wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-11 20:55, Kenny_Naboo wrote:
LOL. 20 slots for inf.
U guys really want to station rush planets don't you?
*rolleyes*
|
|
Actually that's not a bad idea and kind of falls in line with the inherent thought of intended station uses. A station could be used as a remote point for troop staging for an invasion. That way a transport would not have to jump from planet to planet to collect infantry but jump to the station to load and back enroute to the target planet. I do agree that stations (or dreads not designed in a drop ship manner) should not be able to drop infantry on a planet… that’s a transports function. I say increase the number of infantry that can be loaded on a station. I say let them carry 30 infantry and take away their ability to direct drop onto planets.
Would that appease your thoughts Kenny?
|
|
What's there to appease? LOL. You're the Deity. 
I think I've said it somewhere before. Stations should be fleet support vessels, used as a deep space staging area/depot. They're expensive, exclusive, rare even perhaps.
Well, that was the original idea when the game first started. Not many FAs and GAs around. Fast forward 9 years later, everyone's promoted.
You do have a point. Stations should be able to carry infantry but not close drop them like trannies. But regarding limitations to the infantry drop, I believe it has been mentioned somewhere by the Devs that it is a coding issue. Inf are treated like cargo... ie transport pods. So I dunno how much recoding work is needed to do like what you suggested. TWO WEEKS (tm) probably.
But ultimately, I'm not concerned about station tranny rushing planets. Tranny rushing happens. Everybody does that. It's gonna be addressed when the devs relook the planetary interaction anyway.
Stations are also currently fine when it comes down to their armor and armament. They are heavily armored, hard to kill... heavily armed and dangerous to approach. There's nothing wrong with all the current ship layouts. Many players have acknowledged that the balance is about as good as it comes.
It's all about the numbers. That's all there is to it. Too many stations are being spammed right now. If one faction does it, then the other faction will do so too if they have the players with rank. And the whole game becomes boring. Just a slugfest.
LOL. It's like a skewed Corporate hierarchical chart... You have 20 VPs, 10 Directors, 5 managers, and 2 workers.  Where's the logic in that?
I was on a game a few hours ago. FINALLY.... UGTO fielded many torp and battlecruisers to fight ICC and Kluth in R33. It was a 3 way running battle of mainly cruisers, and a few dessies and dreads. It was fast, exciting, lotsa twists and turns. We should do that more often.
I still agree with the ideas.
- Hardcap number of stations (class limits), or;
- Reduce max number of drones repping per ship to 3 or 4, or;
- Raising rank requirements of stations to M and CM
I don't support nerfing weaps or support drones on those tubs. Never liked the idea of nerfing ships.
[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo on 2010-05-11 22:37 ]
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Rhiawhyn Zerinth
Fleet Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: October 31, 2005
Posts: 257
From: I.C.C Deep space refueling station
| Posted: 2010-05-11 23:12
setting the rank limit higher would just anger more people then adding a hard cap, all those people who worked hard to get stations would be VERY angry that they suddenly couldint.
i still agree that a hardcap would work beter anyway, stations are supposed to be rare, not 5 to 6 of them in any given starsystem. a cap of 3 per system would be fine. (per team) one for each class, or all of one. ext ext.
[ This Message was edited by: Rhiawhyn Zerinth on 2010-05-11 23:57 ]
_________________
death is not the greatest loss of life, the greatest lost of life is what dies inside of us while we live.
|
Great Budda
Fleet Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: January 01, 2008
Posts: 157
From: Omaha, NE
| Posted: 2010-05-12 00:32
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-11 23:12, Rhiawhyn Zerinth wrote:
setting the rank limit higher would just anger more people then adding a hard cap, all those people who worked hard to get stations would be VERY angry that they suddenly couldint.
i still agree that a hardcap would work beter anyway, stations are supposed to be rare, not 5 to 6 of them in any given starsystem. a cap of 3 per system would be fine. (per team) one for each class, or all of one. ext ext.
[ This Message was edited by: Rhiawhyn Zerinth on 2010-05-11 23:57 ]
|
|
But if they upped the rank to Marshal then the rank of Marshal would actually mean something instead of a uber honorific. I know it would ruffle feathers but other than the random grumpings what is the real harm? I have always thought that Dreads should be ranked Admiral up and stations should be Marshal up that way it balances out. Will there be some people who throw fits and quit.... yes. Would it reduce the station spam.... yes. Would it bring back the faster/ looser gameplay that everyone remembers as the "Good Old Days"... yes. Would smaller ships have a bigger role in the game than they do currently.... yes. Would the DS community get over it.... I would hope so but I cannot answer for everyone.
In my humble opinion,
_________________
|
Anathemia
1st Rear Admiral
Joined: June 23, 2009
Posts: 38
| Posted: 2010-05-12 06:17
Hmm, of the idea's thrown out in this (read up to about page 5) I'd support the population bonuses.
On the other hand, what about giving armor/shields a resistance modifiers against CLASS OF WEAPONS or something, either the actual group of weapons or the type of ships it's fired from (NOT DAMAGE TYPES! though you keep those in there too obviously )
Cruiser takes normal damage from say missiles or torps or somesuch, dread which is quite powerful against cannons and core weapons due to high HP would take more damage than the cruiser as far as per shot damage goes, not the amount of damage relative to how much hp the target has IE the shield/armor HP percentage. it doesn't make a lot of RL sense but it could be usable as a balance tool >.>
Suddenly it might not be a good idea to spam stations because the other factions hop in torp cruisers (i realize kluth have a torp frigate or dessy or something) and cause moar damage than in a dread assuming your missiles hit. Dreads and stations have one hell of a time trying to hit destroyers or frigates with anything other than lasers.
Cruisers are strong against destroyers but weak to stations etc Sure, there are tactics that are supposed to make these obvious but it just doesn't work that way you can overlay it with assistance of some sort.
It has a metric ton of potential problems, but you can use it as a springboard of some sort. It isn't even fully thought out really, just throwing something out there.
Now where did I put that fire extinguisher...
[ This Message was edited by: Ian9018's Ghost on 2010-05-12 10:37 ]
_________________
Being a troll ftw.
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-05-13 00:44
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-12 06:17, Ian9018's Ghost wrote:
Hmm, of the idea's thrown out in this (read up to about page 5) I'd support the population bonuses.
On the other hand, what about giving armor/shields a resistance modifiers against CLASS OF WEAPONS or something, either the actual group of weapons or the type of ships it's fired from (NOT DAMAGE TYPES! though you keep those in there too obviously )
Cruiser takes normal damage from say missiles or torps or somesuch, dread which is quite powerful against cannons and core weapons due to high HP would take more damage than the cruiser as far as per shot damage goes, not the amount of damage relative to how much hp the target has IE the shield/armor HP percentage. it doesn't make a lot of RL sense but it could be usable as a balance tool >.>
Suddenly it might not be a good idea to spam stations because the other factions hop in torp cruisers (i realize kluth have a torp frigate or dessy or something) and cause moar damage than in a dread assuming your missiles hit. Dreads and stations have one hell of a time trying to hit destroyers or frigates with anything other than lasers.
Cruisers are strong against destroyers but weak to stations etc Sure, there are tactics that are supposed to make these obvious but it just doesn't work that way you can overlay it with assistance of some sort.
It has a metric ton of potential problems, but you can use it as a springboard of some sort. It isn't even fully thought out really, just throwing something out there.
Now where did I put that fire extinguisher...
[ This Message was edited by: Ian9018's Ghost on 2010-05-12 10:37 ]
|
|
Damage modifiers based on ship size or population is never a good idea.
Missile or projectile X should do Y amount of damage to armor. The value should be constant, and not vary just because this faction has less players, or because this ship is smaller and firing on a bigger ship.
It's just complicated and generally "unrealistic".
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2010-05-13 13:34
Granted I haven't been playing this particular game very long, but from my experiences in many, many other MMOs.....
Nerfing is almost never a good idea, unless something actually is vastly overpowered (as in one of them can take on several of anything else and win no matter the tactics used). This doesn't seem to be the case with stations so they should not be nerfed, but I have to say personally I like the idea of changing the loadouts to make each station type more specialized for the role they're described as filling instead of each one being basically the same aside from a few systems. Ships larger than Cruisers actually consuming resources from a planet they spawn at makes sense too. Yes you'll have jerks sitting there waiting while you mine then using what you mined to grab their ship right away, but it would also help to "fix" the Station/Dread spam.
Another thought (probably not a very good one if what I read in the 10 pages of this thread and in other threads is any indication) would be vastly increase the number of population per dome or have level 2 and 3 versions with higher population, and add a population requirement for spawning larger ships. They DO need crew to run and the bigger the ship the more crew needed.
My personal view of station loadouts, take it with a grain of salt.
Battlestations: Lots of long range weaponry and fighters to support fleets nearby, very little close range weaponry, very low or even no repair drones. Lower armor than the other station types but not exactly paper thin, lower cargo for less troops available for defense against hostile troop drops on it. It should be the other ships job to keep enemy ships from getting in close, just as it's the station's job to provide support for the other ships.
Support stations: Obviously a focus on Repair/resupply, with some close range weaponry so they can protect the ships they're repairing. Lots of armor, but no long range weaponry. Lots of cargo space, 20 or more like had been suggested previously in this thread so they're very hard to board successfully and/or can carry tons of resources for quick platform construction.
Command station: A balanced assortment of close, mid, and long range weaponry with lots of ECM/ECCM, a small amount of repair drones, an Interdictor, and perhaps just as important, add mining beams. That gives it the capacity to mine resources to build (and re-build if they're destroyed) platforms to defend itself without having to rely on a constant presence of a fleet to defend it. Not overly good at any combat range, but hard to catch with it's pants down.
Unit caps are annoying, especially when more and more people are able to use those units, but they ARE effective in most places they're used. It forces people to coordinate who is going to use that unit, and where they'll position it. The downside is you'll occasionally have the people who'll use it just because they want to have their turn and team play be damned because it gets in the way of their "fun".
Something else aside from lowering effectiveness of multiple repair drones or limiting the number that can be used on one target would be make the drones themselves targetable and rebuild slowly if destroyed. It would still allow mid combat repairs but at a risk, if you lose your drones you become a liability while they rebuild themselves. It would make supply stations more of a fallback point like it seems they were intended for rather than a frontline tank. Another alternative is changing repair drones into a repair aura that effects all ships nearby (like has already been suggested) but doesn't stack or has diminishing returns when multiples are active in the same area. This would let support stations and support ships still be used in an active combat area, but wouldn't make multiples so overpowered.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
RonZo *FC*
Chief Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: March 17, 2004
Posts: 178
| Posted: 2010-05-14 00:59
Hi!
I really took time to read this station subject and it touches me deep, as my favorite ship was, is and will be, my SS.
U all forgeting something, thats called RANK. To get Grand Admiral, Marshal and Chief Marshal requieres a lot of time, work and fun.
My proposal:
Leave game as it is. Dont touch it as only to fix some normal issues.
1.- Unlimited station to Chief marshal. All kind
2.- Marshal: Unlimited CS and BS. Limited SS.
2.- Grand Admiral: Unlimited Command Stations. Limited spawn on BS and SS.
3.- Fleet Admiral: Limited use of SS. Unlimited use of dreads.
4.- Admirals. Limited use of Dreads. Unlimited use of cruisers.
and so on...
Last thing, dont forget this game is based in planning, tactics, strategies, honor, team work, loyalty, comunications, etc. So as i read before RELEARN HOW TO PLAY. Another true thing, game varies depending on how many people is online on each faction.
I ve personally been beated several times by tons of ICC and Luth stations, and had to run. All depends.
As CEC Fleet leader, will post to reduce the station spam as our colaboration for this issue. But please DONT TOUCH my beloved SS lol!
Cya!
RonZO
_________________
Chief Marshal RonZo
[CEC] Fleet Commander
Since 2004
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
