| Author |
Siphon/EAD/AD |
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
|  Posted: 2006-02-16 05:01
These ships seem to be near fine now (other than the core weapons). A little more armaments would be nice in replacement of the core weapons if they are removed, but other than that, they look almost ship shape.
The main beef with most of them, is their energy systems. I can't remember the Siphon's default power layout, I think it's either two or three, not sure, but something deffinatly needs to be done across the board to fit the type of faction and ship type. For instance, the AD, even though the trate is that ICC generaly have a little less power due to shield systems, has too much power, it needs a reduction. But the EAD, has far too little (UGTO = damage over time, doesn't have the energy to support this), neither does it have the energy to support it's beam layout (since beams use an ungodly amount of power). I can understand the Siphon only having two due to the nature of Kluth (hit and run = you don't need a lot of power for duking it, just for initial strikes and then it can charge back up), but only having two on the EAD seems a little too little to me.
One of the following needs to be done power-wise for these ships:
The AD have a aux power gen removed, this should allow the AD to perfectly fit in with the other ships, since at the moment, it shields give it a nice advantage over the EAD and Siphon (I barely managed to beat Doran).
The EAD given one or two more aux gens, this should allow the EAD to pound around like the other UGTO ships do, since time is very important to UGTO ships (damage over time and such).
The Siphon (I can't remember if it has one or two (or three)), give it two, that should be enough to drive it through two maybe three alpha's before it has to cloak again, that should enforce the hit and run type of play.
As far as armour, I think most of the assault ships have the same layout (more front, less rear). Which is fine, especially for Kluth, since they have the ability to cloak and hide. What doesn't strike me as especially fair is the AD/EAD armour/shield distribution. The AD has an extra rear shield, that the EAD doesn't, allowing it to shunt it's shields to the rear for extra defence, just like any side. But the EAD, which seems to be slower on acceleration (probably because armour is heavier than shields), doesn't have any extra rear armour. I'm sure you're all probably thinking "Jack just wants an uber EAD", but bear with me.
Damage-wise, Kluth can cloak to avoid it, and have the AHR to repair. ICC have their shields, which allows them to pretty much have three extra armour plates (who doesn't rotate their shields?). Yet UGTO ships, which seem to be slower than the others (probably due to armour weight and them having a lot of it), have no extra armour to allow them to compensate. Too much armour could be horrifyingly uberific, yet the current layout of the EAD doesn't seem to allow it to be like the others (avoid getting damaged as long as possible).
On the Siphon, if it gets attacked from behind (taking into account possible cloak and beacon changes), all it has to do is cloak. Voila, it's not taking anymore damage, and it can repair.
For the AD, all it does is cycle its shields, and it has an extra 3 plates wherever the pilot choses. So if someone thinks "REAR = WEAK" for the AD, they're sadly going to be mistaken, since if the pilot wants to run, he's going to punt all his shielding to the rear, making it his strongest point...
The EAD on the other hand, is slow, and you cannot out-manouver the enemy pilot if he gets behind you. With one plate of armour, this just seems too little.
There are probably countless other tweaks that are needed for these ships, since if the core weapons are being removed, and more added, the above power changes probably won't be enough to support them. And there are probably more changes/tweaks to come that no one knows about yet, so I thought I'd make a thread for them. Just so they have a place of their own!
_________________
|
Cataclysm
Cadet
Joined: November 26, 2005
Posts: 45
| Posted: 2006-02-16 06:21
You're talking about armour and Power but you haven't made any mention of the damage these 3 ships can deal. I obviously being VA and quite a new player have never had one of these ships so I would be quite interested to hear your thoughts on how much damage each of the three ships can deal in an alpha or two and how much you feel they should be able to hit.
_________________
|
Sixkiller
Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: May 11, 2005
Posts: 1786
From: Netherlands
| Posted: 2006-02-16 08:44
they hurt. Even EAD hurts in current version, it just has like, no energy.
And when i say they hurt, i mean they hurt when your in a cruiser, and they are 100 gu behind you. That *can* get you killed, assuming your alone, and he has a dictor.
_________________
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2006-02-16 09:04
The factions depict what damage each ship should do.
Kluth = The most damage in an alpha, but over time, it should lose it's damage to the other ships, so the aim is to take down ships fast, or atleast force them to leave the battle.
ICC = Defence, defence, defence. It's basicly just abusing your defence systems and trying to force the enemy to withdraw because he's taking more damage than you. ICC v UGTO battles tend to last longer because they're both semi-duking factions.
UGTO = Speed and power. Abusing the energy to get speed out of your ship and continue laying down the fire. The fact that UGTO uses mostly energy weapons with no ammo withstrictions supports this.
So...
Siphon, should have the most damage of any ship in on alpha.
The AD, should be doing quite the bit of damage, but the least of all, but have reasonable defence.
The EAD, should be almost like the AD, but not exactly. Giving it more power, and energy based weapons allows it to exert it's speed advantage and keep the weapons firing. Doing damage over time, like UGTO ships are meant to do.
_________________
|
Shigernafy
Admiral
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 5726
From: The Land of Taxation without Representation
| Posted: 2006-02-16 09:51
I say we just remove all three of these ships..
Not like anybody likes them anyway.... 
_________________
* [S.W]AdmBito @55321 Sent \"I dunno; the French had a few missteps. But they're on the right track, one headbutt at a time.\"
|
James Bum007
Grand Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: April 23, 2003
Posts: 480
From: Queens, New York
| Posted: 2006-02-16 10:11
The mandi needs at least one more generator, I really dont see the use for one eccm. 3 generators should do it, we dont want to be running out of energy so soon. We'll have to stay visible and destroy somebody eventually.
All this hit and run will affect our kill ration, allowing the enemy to repair as well.
Besides that everything else is dandy.
"Nough Said"
_________________
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2006-02-16 10:40
Quote:
|
On 2006-02-16 10:11, James Bum 007 wrote:
The mandi needs at least one more generator, I really dont see the use for one eccm. 3 generators should do it, we dont want to be running out of energy so soon. We'll have to stay visible and destroy somebody eventually.
All this hit and run will affect our kill ration, allowing the enemy to repair as well.
Besides that everything else is dandy.
"Nough Said"
|
|
I was just in beta, and the mandy rocked, doesn't need more aux gens AT ALL. Alos, the topic says Siphon/EAD/AD, not Mandable  . I fired on sixkiller, and on Ronzo in the mandable, and managed to almost kill ronzo (the decloak time was a serious problem). Appart from that, the mandable was absolutly devistating. I took down Sixkillers three front armours on a TC in two alpha's, and went into hull (quite significantly too).
No change needed on the Mandable.
@ Shig, NO TOUCHIE MY EAD
[ This Message was edited by: BackSlash *Jack* on 2006-02-16 10:42 ]
_________________
|
James Bum007
Grand Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: April 23, 2003
Posts: 480
From: Queens, New York
| Posted: 2006-02-16 10:50
Maybe is because I like to chase my pray and finish what I started. Otherwise no complains from me.
"Nough Said"
_________________
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2006-02-16 11:38
Dread's are hardly chasing ships though, are they?
_________________
|
Sixkiller
Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: May 11, 2005
Posts: 1786
From: Netherlands
| Posted: 2006-02-16 12:08
referring to what james said, good reason why fighterbays should stay on mandy.
_________________
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2006-02-16 15:02
Okay, im going to go off pure logic here. I dont need to test beta, this is simply just how it should be, in concept at least.
Every faction, as said before, has their niche. The Elite Dreadnoughts are pretty much the epitome of those niches, highly specialized, close combat, maximized damage.
Needless to say, these ships should - note should - have the energy capabilities to hold on in fights longer than other ships - especially the EAD. Tough armor - in the fore and sides, but very weak in the rear.
Now about those niches.
Kluth are damage whores. We know this well, but they have weak defence. Less defence than any other Elite dreadnought, but also, the highest 'burst' damage - that is the highest damage per alpha. But they also suck up energy, so they cant prolong fights.
If cloaking has - or is being - fixed so that its near instantanious, then its set as its hit and run ways. However if cloaking takes too long, as decloaking too, then no matter how bloody stealthy it is, it wont ever get the first shot off.
Ever. And they rely on that.
ICC are defence freaks. Their shields name it as such. Low damage, high defence ships, the AD should have the energy to maintain for some time, and its defence unrivaled anywhere. But it lacks in its damage department, though they have the most energy efficent weapons, they lack in power in comparison to the EAD and Siphon.
Shields are its thing. With high defence all around with armor AND shields, it is a tough nut to crack, thus me must ensure that the AD does have that defence.
Lastly, the EAD.
The UGTO are the middleman, they specialize in fighters, but this is close combat. With average defence and such, its not a defence freak, but its not lacking in firepower either, its main damage lieing in its beams.
The EAD should be desigined with damage of time in mind - with energy reserves that last for a while if controlled is unmatched in battlefield longevity and durability, but fails under immense fire.
Those are my beliefs though. This is based off the logic of the factions and how I feel these ships should be - that is, they perform their niche in their faction admirably and specialized so. But they do not excell without doing so.
**May elaborate further**
-Ent
_________________
|
Feralwulf
Grand Admiral
Joined: January 24, 2004
Posts: 1729
From: sitting somewhere drinking beer
| Posted: 2006-02-16 15:24
Quote:
|
On 2006-02-16 10:50, James Bum 007 wrote:
Maybe is because I like to chase my pray and finish what I started. Otherwise no complains from me.
"Nough Said"
|
|
GO UGTO "Nough Said"
_________________
 rnrn
Don't mess with old dudes...age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill!
|
Veronw
Marshal
Joined: December 13, 2004
Posts: 554
| Posted: 2006-02-16 19:26
well since the Sipon/EAD/AD are the main powerhouses for each respective faction, i am in agreement with jack, and alos i dont think that any of these ships should have anything less than 2 armor/sheild plates in rear....otherwise u could get behind them in a dessy, take out the armor, and let anther dread mvoe in for the kill...or even use said dread to destroy them.....seems more like a screaming metal deathtrap in its current state to me.... NOTE: this is from observation of each of these ships in combat...plz keep this in mind before u all flame me
_________________
|
Ants
Chief Marshal
Joined: February 11, 2005
Posts: 315
From: Canada
| Posted: 2006-02-17 23:34
Ok you guys have some very good Points on the EAD/AD/Siphon...
I have a few things to point out:
First the Siphon as you say "hit and run" is what they do, and dealing heavy damage doing so.. but what iv noticed In beta with 2 power gens is you alpha With core weapon kills your power and trying to get another Alpha out drains way to much power to actull Cloak and move off at a good speed.. "meaning they run off at 10 gu while cloaking the attacking ship manually target your excape path to easily... but could change as we dont know whats with the power or cloak timer...
Ok the EAD is a great ship... dose alot of damage but yes it should get more power, but the rear armour in my mind is good to the ratio of the ship but over all the armour hit points shoud be brought up a TAD.. on all dread.
An finnaly the AD the Assult Dread of the ICC fleet... Yes ICC is ment to be defensive and to look at the the Missile Dread and the sheilds and the pulse beams... lets put it this way most of ICC ships are ment for Defensive combat but the Assult class ships are made to be purly that... On saying that Yes the AD uses Sheilds but in fact should be giving out less Damage.
OK those are my views of this topic and what I have seen in Beta so far... but As Jack has said we dont know what the outcome is going to be like but so far they are on the right track in the most part..
Also i would suggest that if the Core weapons do infact stay on the dreads they should be removed from the Alpha and assigned to a letter like "C" or ahave a min range on them...
_________________
|
Ants
Chief Marshal
Joined: February 11, 2005
Posts: 315
From: Canada
| Posted: 2006-02-17 23:34
hummmm.... no reasion for a second post 
[ This Message was edited by: Fatal Ants *XO 1* on 2006-02-20 07:49 ]
_________________
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
