| Author |
Ship Tiers and You |
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
|  Posted: 2012-12-29 01:25
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-28 22:02, YIIMM wrote:
As someone who dislikes flying anything bigger than a cruiser (I do have a dread and a station in my garage but they almost never see the light of day) I welcome this change wholeheartedly.
I have a hell of a lot more fun flying the smaller ships but almost always find myself in the minority surrounded by dreads and stations. Having the fleets so top-heavy means a lot of ships that the devs have gone to the trouble of creating and balancing almost never get used.
I couldn't see a solution to dreadspace but I think this may do the trick.
|
|
.... and probably slowing down dread turn rates and acceleration/deceleration drastically. Along with stations too. 
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Admiral Valeor Tackle
Admiral
Joined: February 26, 2012
Posts: 106
| Posted: 2012-12-29 02:28
This idea was the best. I love it.  +3
_________________
Pleasse do not cry
|
Admiral Valeor Tackle
Admiral
Joined: February 26, 2012
Posts: 106
| Posted: 2012-12-29 02:42
Oh. Are we gonna have new ship models for this?
_________________
Pleasse do not cry
|
Brutality
Marshal
Joined: May 25, 2009
Posts: 659
From: Alaska, USA
| Posted: 2012-12-29 02:55
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-29 02:42, Protocolization Complication wrote:
Oh. Are we gonna have new ship models for this?
|
|
If you look in beta there are already a few. And I'm sure Kenny is working on more as we speak.
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2012-12-29 07:59
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-29 02:55, Fatal Brutality *COM* wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-29 02:42, Protocolization Complication wrote:
Oh. Are we gonna have new ship models for this?
|
|
If you look in beta there are already a few. And I'm sure Kenny is working on more as we speak.
|
|
Affirmative. Though the team is currently low key for the holidays, they've plans for the game. New models and rework of existing models are ongoing and will go hand in hand with the Tier system.
ATM, I'm the only active modeler on the team so I'm limited in terms of how fast i can think up and create, or rework, the models.
As Jack said in a recent Q&A, if you can model and/or texture, do post your designs up in the forum. The lead Devs will get in touch with you if they like your work.
The team could always use an extra hand around. Hell, I could use a partner in crime.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Brutality
Marshal
Joined: May 25, 2009
Posts: 659
From: Alaska, USA
| Posted: 2012-12-29 08:57
You do some amazing work dude and thanks for the time you put into this game. 
_________________
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2012-12-29 10:36
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-28 10:58, Talien wrote:
That's actually kinda disappointing. From the way you put it earlier about lower tier ships being more specialized it made it sound like they'd have more weapons of one type, and higher tier ships would be more diverse in their loadouts but not be able to do one single role as well as a more specialized lower tier ship. But if what you just posted here is accurate and not just something you pulled out of a hat as an example, the higher tier ships can do what a lower tier ship can do, only better, plus with another role added in.
|
|
That *is* the general idea. The problem is that smaller ships have fewer points to work with to start, and that makes it harder to work with them.
With Dreadnoughts, though, I have lots of wiggle room, so the differences there are more obvious. Take a look at these two:
M-400L Combat Dreadnought (Tier 1, Cannon Role)
During the Third Stellar War, the 300-series dreadnoughts served the ICC well in their fight against UGTO aggression. It was the M-305M Missile Dreadnoughts that won the day, however; the M-303A Combat Dreads and M-306T Torpedo Dreads found themselves consistently outmatched against the UGTO's main battle fleet while the M-305s hammered them into scrap from long range. After the war the Confederate Navy sought to address this shortcoming by developing an entirely new series of dreadnought hull, one purpose-built to stand toe-to-toe against UGTO battle squadrons. The M-400L Combat Dreadnought is the end result of that program and it has proven itself admirably. Armed with some of the heaviest broadside batteries ever seen on a dreadnought, the 400 can devastate targets from far beyond their ability to reply effectively. Production of the M-400 series dreadnoughts accelerated to a breakneck pace after the Fourth Stellar War broke out and today the 400 is the most numerous ship in the Confederate Navy's capital fleet.
Layout:
- 1x Tachyon Drive
- 4x IE Drive
- 5x Composite Armor
- 4x Active Shields
- 1x Pulse Shield
- 2x Full-arc Point-defense Beam
- 2x Tri-arc Point-defense Beam
- 2x Tri-arc Ion Cannon
- 6x Tri-arc Heavy Railgun
- 4x Dual-arc Heavy Railgun
- 1x ECCM
- 3x Auxiliary Fusion Generator
M-307M Missile Dreadnought (Tier 1, Missile role)
During the Third Stellar War, no single ship class in the Confederate Navy was more instrumental to their victory than the M-305M Missile Dreadnought. Packing more heavy missile launchers than ever seen on a single ship before, it was able to routinely overwhelm the Trade Navy's point-defenses. During the First Battle of Luyten the 305Ms of the 7th Capital Squadron destroyed five times their tonnage in Battle Dreadnoughts. As the Confederate Navy modernized their dreadnought force after the war, many of the older M-303A Combat Dreads that were being replaced by the new M-400 series were converted to serve as Missile Dreads, while existing 305Ms were upgraded with newer missiles. The arrival of the K'Luth changed the equation, however, and while the modern M-307M is still a formidable weapons platform it no longer enjoys the respect it once commanded--far, far too many of them have died to K'Luth attacks without being able to fire a shot.
Layout:
- 1x Tachyon Drive
- 4x IE Drive
- 4x Composite Armor
- 4x Active Shields
- 1x Pulse Shield
- 2x Full-arc Point-defense Beam
- 2x Tri-arc Point-defense Beam
- 12x Harpex Missile
- 1x Aft-arc Tractor Beam
- 1x ECM
- 3x Auxiliary Fusion Generator
Pretty hefty railgun battery on the CD, and a beefy missile payload on the MD, right (don't worry about balance; Harpex missiles are getting a significant damage nerf to account for them being more numerous)? Now let's take a look at a Tier 2 ship that combines both those roles.
M-412L/M Line Dreadnought (Tier 2, Cannons + Missile roles)
The M-400L Combat Dreadnought and M-307M Missile Dreadnought are two of the most effective ships the ICC has. When Shi Jie began its Advanced Combat Designs program, the idea of combining the two in one multi-role ship was raised early on, and the M-412L/M is the end result. Although it lacks the 400's heavy Ion Cannons and only has two-thirds the missile launchers of the 307, it makes up for the loss in firepower with an increase in versatility. The ability to engage multiple target types at a variety of ranges makes it supremely responsive to the quickly-changing tides of battle, and the Admiralty is already demanding twice as many ships in the second production run.
Proposed layout:
- 1x Tachyon Drive
- 4x IE Drive
- 3x Composite Armor
- 4x Active Shields
- 1x Pulse Shield
- 2x Full-arc Point-defense Beam
- 2x Tri-arc Point-defense Beam
- 6x Tri-arc Heavy Railgun
- 8x Dual-arc Heavy Railgun
- 1x Aft-arc Heavy Railgun
- 8x Linear Drive Missile
- 1x ECM
- 3x Auxiliary Fusion Generator
The Tier 2 ship has no Ion Cannons, which make up a fairly big chunk of the CD's firepower. It has a few extra Railguns, though. It's also only got 8 missile launchers to the MD's 12. So it can do both jobs, but it's not *quite* as good at them as either of the Tier 1 ships. It's also more fragile, as it loses an armor plate due to having Missiles and doesn't have that Tier 1 bonus armor to make up the difference.
Keep in mind that all these values and layouts are tenative and can still be changed prior to release. I'll see if I can work and bring this sort of balance to some of the smaller ships better.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2012-12-29 10:36 ]
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Brutality
Marshal
Joined: May 25, 2009
Posts: 659
From: Alaska, USA
| Posted: 2012-12-29 10:58
Can I have fighters on my combat dread and assault dread again? jk 
These new layouts are going to bring some new tactics into play.... can't wait!!
_________________
|
YIIMM
Grand Admiral
Joined: June 16, 2005
Posts: 851
From: Barcino, Hispania Tarraconensis
| Posted: 2012-12-29 12:20
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-29 01:25, Kenny_Naboo[+R] wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-28 22:02, YIIMM wrote:
I couldn't see a solution to dreadspace but I think this may do the trick.
|
|
.... and probably slowing down dread turn rates and acceleration/deceleration drastically. Along with stations too.
|
|
Well, I meant beyond simply getting out the nerfbat. I don't really enjoy it but you can't punish people for always lumping for the best ship available to them and I don't really see dreads and stations being overpowered relative to other ships, just that there are too many of them.
Tweaking the effectiveness of ships based on player numbers is a bad idea generally but the tier system seems to be a much better one.
[ This Message was edited by: YIIMM on 2012-12-29 12:21 ]
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2012-12-29 12:48
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-29 12:20, YIIMM wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-29 01:25, Kenny_Naboo[+R] wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-28 22:02, YIIMM wrote:
I couldn't see a solution to dreadspace but I think this may do the trick.
|
|
.... and probably slowing down dread turn rates and acceleration/deceleration drastically. Along with stations too.
|
|
Well, I meant beyond simply getting out the nerfbat. I don't really enjoy it but you can't punish people for always lumping for the best ship available to them and I don't really see dreads and stations being overpowered relative to other ships, just that there are too many of them.
Tweaking the effectiveness of ships based on player numbers is a bad idea generally but the tier system seems to be a much better one.
[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo[+R] on 2012-12-29 12:49 ]
|
|
The idea of making dreads and stations less maneuverable was actually coined a while back and supported by quite a few players. It's not set in stone yet. It's just a thought that is going around, being considered.
Generally, I think dreads are just a little too agile for their size and bulk. Dessies can't quite dance around dreads because they turn too fast. If we slow the turn rate and accel/decel of a dreadnought down, we'll then be adding a bit of disincentive to bring a powerful but unwieldy asset into the battlefield willy nilly.
In numbers, they'd still be a threat because you can position them tactically and saturate the battlespace with their firepower. But alone, they'd be more vulnerable to agile ships that can dance around them.
This is a good thing because it'll balance firepower/armor versus mobility. Plus it'll add a certain element of thought behind flying a dread. You'll have to consider heading and positioning before committing yourself to a battle.
A big ship that has big firepower should come with its own set of problems.
Think about this one.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
-xTc- ExisT
Chief Marshal
Army Of Darkness
Joined: March 20, 2010
Posts: 534
From: Red Lobster
| Posted: 2012-12-29 15:02
I agree with kenny on that point. I personally hate dreads; they are the answer to everything, they require such little thought and strategy to use, and they dont really take very much skill to fly.
Dreadspace is too easy. CHALLENGE ME
With the new tier system, I see DS becoming more dynamic, as we will TRULY have multiple ways to counter your enemy, and counter your enemies counter. Constant adaptation. Gone will be the mindset of "bigger is better"
I can't wait.
_________________
*Connection lost, attempting reconnect in 30 seconds....
Do you really want to just pay bills until you die?
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2012-12-29 16:26
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-29 10:36, Jim Starluck wrote:
That *is* the general idea. The problem is that smaller ships have fewer points to work with to start, and that makes it harder to work with them.
Keep in mind that all these values and layouts are tenative and can still be changed prior to release. I'll see if I can work and bring this sort of balance to some of the smaller ships better.
|
|
I was hoping that might be the case. I'm also hoping we'll see non-assault ships that have a single armor plate or an extra armor plate in front turn that odd man out armor into a full coverage plate.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
Zero28
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 25, 2006
Posts: 591
| Posted: 2012-12-29 18:09
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-29 10:36, Jim Starluck wrote:
That *is* the general idea. The problem is that smaller ships have fewer points to work with to start, and that makes it harder to work with them.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2012-12-29 10:36 ]
|
|
thsi siw here i want to get at, What about ships of the same class (E.G Destroyer)?
a tier 1 ICC combat dessie with cannon role, has less weaponry of its class then a tier 2 and even less that its tier 3 counter part Wich pretty much make the higher tier more specialised in the same roles + 2 more roles
anyone see were im getting at?
_________________
19:33:51 [ZION]GothThug {C?}: "Zero..you are DS's hero"
|
*FTL*Soulless
Marshal
Joined: June 25, 2010
Posts: 787
From: Dres-Kona
| Posted: 2012-12-30 10:36
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-29 18:09, Zero28 wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2012-12-29 10:36, Jim Starluck wrote:
That *is* the general idea. The problem is that smaller ships have fewer points to work with to start, and that makes it harder to work with them.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2012-12-29 10:36 ]
|
|
thsi siw here i want to get at, What about ships of the same class (E.G Destroyer)?
a tier 1 ICC combat dessie with cannon role, has less weaponry of its class then a tier 2 and even less that its tier 3 counter part Wich pretty much make the higher tier more specialised in the same roles + 2 more roles
anyone see were im getting at?
|
|
Yeah i see it to.
So is that how its gonna be jim? Since i was thinking it would be the other way around
_________________
We are Back from the shadows.
|
DiepLuc
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 23, 2010
Posts: 1187
| Posted: 2012-12-30 13:33
I love to contribute some experience about the tier essence:
Minelayer needs ECM.
Missle/fighter needs scanner.
Beam needs ECCM.
So,
M-307M Missile Dreadnought: 1x ECM
ST-125 Elite Assault Dreadnought: 1x Scanner
M-412L/M Line Dreadnought (Tier 2, Cannons + Missile roles): 1x ECM
Well, I will give 307M and 412L/M a scanner instead of ECM and ST 125 an ECCM.
Something to remind:
Quote:
| On 2012-12-24 01:54, Jim Starluck wrote:
- Cruisers
-- Talent: When the going gets tough, the tough get going! All Cruisers have an extra Armor plate to help them survive, and they always carry an E-War device so they can't be taken by surprise! |
|
Parasite: no E-war device.
M-239A/L-M Strike Cruiser: no E-war device.
Quote:
| On 2012-12-24 01:54, Jim Starluck wrote:
- Missiles
-- Talent: All those launchers and ammo magazines take up an awful lot of room, so these ships lose 1 armor plate--usually from the rear end. Don't let badguys get in behind 'em! |
|
M-47L/M-S Sniper Frigate: 1 armor plate for all direction
M-239A/L-M Strike Cruiser: 3 x front, 2x others
And I think that 307M layout has been changed regularly after each post.
.
... It's best that you introduce tier and role so we can check for you.
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
