| Author |
Hull scaling? |
Coeus
Grand Admiral
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: March 22, 2006
Posts: 2815
From: Philly
|  Posted: 2008-05-10 22:44
And you know what, not for nothing... I'm a frickin Grand Admiral. There is no fricking reason in the game that I SHOULDN'T want to take out a Dread or Station (personally, I prefer a dread - stations bore me). Otherwise why the hell am I a GA? Dreadnoughts are supposed to be the most powerful ships out there. Small ships should run & cower in fear before the - like they used to. I don't want to fight scouts and frigates, but if they get in my way they should get whats coming to them. Dreads are there to fight cruisers dreads & stations. Scouts & frigates belong in the newbie server, or else scouting out enemies & beaconing K'Luth. Thats it, they have no place in combat - there shouldn't even be any consideration for them taking on a dread, because they really don't belong there.
[Edit]
From a conversation in F chat about this issue.
* [=TB=]Hellza - Dark Master @99379 sent to Friends: "have you read my post?  coeus"
* You sent to Friends: "Aye, and its all 100% true"
* You sent to Friends: "but you know what else? even thats a stretch... a dessy shouldn't have the staying power to engage a dread."
* You sent to Friends: "err, a fleet of dessies"
* You sent to Friends: "they should run out of ammo and/or energy before then, because while they'll be continuously ducking & weaving, every time that dread strikes a dessy should be limping away."
* [=TB=]Hellza - Dark Master @99379 sent to Friends: "it was a figure of saying coues,, 30ish dessys all firing at one dread.. will hurt.. and i agree, its like a group of people with swords but not armour, in a ring with a raging bull."
* You sent to Friends: "flying smartly, dreads outnumbered 2/1 by cruisers & dessies, dreads should win."
* You sent to Friends: "well yeah, 30 vs 1, yeah... haha"
* [=TB=]Hellza - Dark Master @99379 sent to Friends: "meanwhile a fleet of dreads.. if flown ff smart wise. should clean the floor of the dessys hands down"
* You sent to Friends: "exactly, look at dessies & cruisers vs dreads like a bullfight... keep dodging & ducking... but when that bull strikes... time for a new matador."
* [Raven]Crim {R33} @94102 sent to Friends: "Matadors usually win, though"
* [=TB=]Hellza - Dark Master @99379 sent to Friends: "and i do believe everyone keeps forgetting about dictors to?.."
* You sent to Friends: "how many matedors don't make it to retirement though =P"
* You sent to Friends: "or even the grand arena"
* [=TB=]Hellza - Dark Master @99379 sent to Friends: "very true xD"
* [Raven]Crim {R33} @94102 sent to Friends: "Heheh"
* You sent to Friends: "Exactly! A single dictor comes in will neutralize dreads for the most part."
* [=TB=]Hellza - Dark Master @99379 sent to Friends: "i was talking about hte interdictor ship. not the build one"
* [=TB=]Hellza - Dark Master @99379 sent to Friends: "no worries  "
* You sent to Friends: "thats what I'm talking about. A dictor flies in on the enemy team and all dreads need to be outbound."
[ This Message was edited by: Cuddley Coeus Teddybear on 2008-05-10 22:55 ]
_________________
Do I really look like a guy with a plan?
'I'm gonna go crazy, and I'm taking you with me!'
ICC Security Council Chief Enforcer
|
_x$witchBladex_ [1.480 Fanboy]
Grand Admiral
Joined: February 26, 2003
Posts: 849
From: Upstate New York
| Posted: 2008-05-10 22:58
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-10 22:44, Cuddley Coeus Teddybear wrote:
And you know what, not for nothing... I'm a frickin Grand Admiral. There is no fricking reason in the game that I SHOULDN'T want to take out a Dread or Station (personally, I prefer a dread - stations bore me). Otherwise why the hell am I a GA? Dreadnoughts are supposed to be the most powerful ships out there. Small ships should run & cower in fear before the - like they used to. I don't want to fight scouts and frigates, but if they get in my way they should get whats coming to them. Dreads are there to fight cruisers dreads & stations. Scouts & frigates belong in the newbie server, or else scouting out enemies & beaconing K'Luth. Thats it, they have no place in combat - there shouldn't even be any consideration for them taking on a dread, because they really don't belong there.
|
|
See, I understand where you are coming from. But I feel that our general idea of this is somewhat hurt because of the nerfed bombing and how easily noobs have gained high rank through no work. I know everyone feels that scouts and frigs should be worthless; that's how it has always been. But as I said before, while dreads should absolutely own anything one on one, they shouldn't be able to own mass amounts of ships.
-Switch
_________________
* [=TB=]Enterprise @39933 sent to Clan: "Thats a lie Switch, you'd never let anyone else drink rum if it were right there. You'd slip teh roofies in and start drinking it yourself and not even realize it."
|
Tael
2nd Rear Admiral
Palestar
Joined: July 03, 2002
Posts: 3695
From: San Francisco Bay Area
| Posted: 2008-05-10 23:35
For the nay sayers so far, reread what I said. First off, NOT to scale with the game, GENERALIZATION to get the idea across. Second, I said a "few seconds". 20/30 was again not to scale, but along the lines of "example".
This forces selective fire and energy management on larger ships and allows newer players to still mash away at the space bar. If you want to alpha with a bigger ship, you will bring considerably more power to bare, but then are stuck with fewer weapons and longer recharge times till your systems recover.
If a Dread has energy capacity for 65% of all its weapons and devices (and you may not be using your eccm/ecm at the same time) and NOT travelling at full speed, you can sustain fire with different weapons and maintain your energy reserve and charge, but if you start firing to quickly or mash an alpha, your system only has enough energy capacity to recharge 65% of the expended power, so you take about 30% longer to recover full charge. Not 20 to 30 seconds, depending on the devices you are using and your speed, closer to 5 seconds...
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-10 18:52, Tael wrote:
...while the bigger the ships ... are forced to selective fire...
Two alphas, you might be out of power for 30 seconds... (you get the idea)
The bigger ships may do more damage over all ... energy management becomes paramount.
...isnt to scale with the game...
Scout ... run 75%/80% max speed ... maintain power.
Destroyer ... run 65% max speed ... battle longer ... out of energy slower...
Dread ... quickly depelete ... energy reserves ... alpha striking... heavier armor ... battle longer ... abuse ... tactically choosing weapons and targets
...smaller ships ... less damage ... zip in and out of battle... good blast from dread at right moment ... serious damage ... smaller ships... alpha may leave the dread exposed ... a few seconds, |
|
_________________
|
Hellza - Dark Master
Fleet Admiral
Praetorian Wolves
Joined: June 06, 2004
Posts: 498
| Posted: 2008-05-11 01:03
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-10 23:35, Tael wrote:
For the nay sayers so far, reread what I said. First off, NOT to scale with the game, GENERALIZATION to get the idea across. Second, I said a "few seconds". 20/30 was again not to scale, but along the lines of "example".
This forces selective fire and energy management on larger ships and allows newer players to still mash away at the space bar. If you want to alpha with a bigger ship, you will bring considerably more power to bare, but then are stuck with fewer weapons and longer recharge times till your systems recover.
If a Dread has energy capacity for 65% of all its weapons and devices (and you may not be using your eccm/ecm at the same time) and NOT travelling at full speed, you can sustain fire with different weapons and maintain your energy reserve and charge, but if you start firing to quickly or mash an alpha, your system only has enough energy capacity to recharge 65% of the expended power, so you take about 30% longer to recover full charge. Not 20 to 30 seconds, depending on the devices you are using and your speed, closer to 5 seconds...
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-10 18:52, Tael wrote:
...while the bigger the ships ... are forced to selective fire...
Two alphas, you might be out of power for 30 seconds... (you get the idea)
The bigger ships may do more damage over all ... energy management becomes paramount.
...isnt to scale with the game...
Scout ... run 75%/80% max speed ... maintain power.
Destroyer ... run 65% max speed ... battle longer ... out of energy slower...
Dread ... quickly depelete ... energy reserves ... alpha striking... heavier armor ... battle longer ... abuse ... tactically choosing weapons and targets
...smaller ships ... less damage ... zip in and out of battle... good blast from dread at right moment ... serious damage ... smaller ships... alpha may leave the dread exposed ... a few seconds, |
|
|
|
thank you tael for clearing that up  . I can understand about that. I agree with the full speed + aplha would run the ship dry pretty fast.
Edit:
on a side note, i was watching over a F chat about torps. the dreads are very good in beta right now. and can still dodge torps.
I was wondering if it was possible to bring back tracking torps? (or just for anything below dreads maybe? a idea) or a new type of torp. a Trackable Torp. its damage output would be about say a Fusion Torp?.
Energy drain as a Proton Torp? and have about 500gu range?.
I say about F torp damage due to its trackling ability cause its more likely to hit more then any other torps in game.
~Hellza
[ This Message was edited by: Hellza - Dark Master on 2008-05-11 01:48 ]
_________________
I am watching you in the dark shadows
|
Leonide
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: October 01, 2005
Posts: 1553
From: Newport News, Virginia
| Posted: 2008-05-11 06:21
and considering the tracking abilities of current ammo (like Missiles, which is abysmal at best) i don't think it would unbalance the game either...
[ This Message was edited by: leonide *EP5*(DA-U) on 2008-05-11 06:22 ]
_________________
captain of the ICC Assault Cruiser C.S.S. Sledgehammer
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2008-05-11 07:21
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-10 22:58, _x$witchBladex_ the Rum Loving Pirate wrote:
See, I understand where you are coming from. But I feel that our general idea of this is somewhat hurt because of the nerfed bombing and how easily noobs have gained high rank through no work. I know everyone feels that scouts and frigs should be worthless; that's how it has always been. But as I said before, while dreads should absolutely own anything one on one, they shouldn't be able to own mass amounts of ships.
-Switch
|
|
Insert > Skill.
Problem solved.
And Tael, thats why you don't generalize. Being specific means that you don't get beat up in your arguments. It sounds better, also on paper, than before. May be worth a try in beta, but I wouldn't throw it in release without making sure it doesn't make Dread pilots go QQ.
-Ent
_________________
|
Coeus
Grand Admiral
Sundered Weimeriners
Joined: March 22, 2006
Posts: 2815
From: Philly
| Posted: 2008-05-11 23:04
While I certainly don't enjoy the idea of it in general, I am more than happy to help test it out & see how it works. Who knows, this might be the missing link in bringing back the fun of combat that we lost after 480...
_________________
Do I really look like a guy with a plan?
'I'm gonna go crazy, and I'm taking you with me!'
ICC Security Council Chief Enforcer
|
-Shadowalker-™
Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: September 23, 2007
Posts: 709
From: Shadows
| Posted: 2008-05-12 16:12
IF there is anything i can do to help, please ask, ill see what i can do.
_________________
|
Eledore Massis [R33]
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: May 26, 2002
Posts: 2694
From: tsohlacoLocalhost
| Posted: 2008-05-13 01:41
Quote:
| On 2008-05-08 22:28, Shigernafy wrote:
Also, Eledore is right. Ships have more gadgets, so more things to track
..........
Would it reduce lag to make every ship have one weapon that scales in power based on the hull size? Maybe, especially if its a beam. Should we do it? Probably not. |
|
I have been thinking about this a bit.
I would say reduce the devices! ok ok keep with me on this one plz.
I'm taking 483 as a building set, since 484 ships ain't finished yet.
ICC's M300 Missile Dreadnought has 12 AR and 8 IT, so a total of 20 missiles. We could you say the Dreadnought has 20 missile launchers.But why don't we look at it from a other perspective. Why not have missile rack/banks?
Example: a AR bank fires 4 missiles a IT bank fires 2 missiles.
Instead of having 20 devices on the Dread it should get lowered to 7! 3x4=12 AR, 4x2=8 IT. (if you still want 12 AR missiles and 8 IT that is.)
Later on you might want to give UGTO and ICC different values,
For example i would go for UGTO AR has 3 missiles but ICC has 4 missiles per bank. This might be a bit harder to balance but gives each faction more individual properties.
K'Luth on that hand i got some idea's about it. but i think i covered them in my K'Luth chapter.
You might say you can apply this theorie to cannons to but i would go against that.
Currently where getting two kind of cannon classes; Primary Weapons and Core Weapons. The later being the big guns.
_________________
DS Discordion
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2008-05-14 10:14
Also bare in mind that bigger ships projectiles move slower, and generally have a harder time hitting smaller ships. We already see this to a LARGE scale in the current version where you're barely able to hit a cruiser if it's manoeuvring well.
Whilst energy design still needs to be thought out regarding Dreadnoughts and Stations (they kind of have to be thought of as separate entities), what Tael said would of gone into thought when we get to the Dreads and such.
There are many, many things we can do to stop players going after small ships, and I do not think making the larger ships worse against smaller ones is the way to go.
Quite honestly, how often do you see a smaller ship being killed by Dreadnoughts this patch (without QST's)?
YES, they'll be vastly superior this patch.
BUT, they still have the slow projectile speeds, turning, and acceleration.
If you die in one, it's because you got too close - and it's a lesson we all had to learn as a new player.
_________________
|
Drafell
Grand Admiral
Mythica
Joined: May 30, 2003
Posts: 2449
From: United Kingdom
| Posted: 2008-05-15 10:00
This is more-or-less a copy of what has been posted in the PDF:
One of the primary reasons for completely reworking core-weapons is to reduce gadget counts on the dreadnoughts and stations, and to help reduce the total projectile count in the game. Fewer objects to track equates to a lighter network load.
Each 'core' class weapon equates to roughly four primary cannons, in terms of actual DPS and energy usage. But in terms of relative 'size' they take up about 6x the space of a primary cannon.
The projectiles are faster than primaries, but combined with the limited number of projectiles (one for SI and QST, two for IC) they are only good against large, or slower moving targets. A dread should be feared by anything smaller, but not if those small ships keep at range and keep moving. If they get in beam range , or stop, then they are toast.
Nearly every dreadnought should have one core weapon, with the Dread2 class having between 3-7, along with a larger number of heavy beams, as befits the 'assault' designation.
Stations should only have core weapons, heavy beams, light beams, and missiles. "Battle" class stations would focus on core weapon and heavy beams, "Support" class stations would focus on light beams and missiles, and "Command" classes would put a heavier emphasis on fighters, and a blend of the other weapons types as befits their mixed role. The intention is to entirely remove primary weapons and torpedoes from the station class, as they do not scale well at high levels.
The other change that I want to make, and that will have a huge impact on gadget numbers, is to change how fighter bays work.
Instead of each bay launching one fighter at a time, I want change it so that each 'volley' is three fighters, and cutting the number of actual gadgets on each ship in accordance.
As examples:
An Agincourt would have three bays, instead of 8. It would actually gain one fighter, but lose some other weapons.
The Command Station would go from having 12 bays, to only having 4 bays. This will free up a lot of screen real estate. The effect on latency will be minimal, but it probably will save a few CPU cycles when the client updates each gadget.
The same goes for all other carrier class ships.
The basic HP modifiers for each ship class have also been adjusted, but this needs to be complimented by re-factoring the actual base HP for those gadgets, as scouts, frigates and destroyers are currently a lot weaker than they should be.
Dreadnoughts are largely OK for armor, they have approximately the right value in terms of scale as do cruisers, so I was planning on increasing the base HP of each armor gadget, and decreasing the level modifier.
Essentially, balance should work out as a pyramid. Roughly speaking it should work out as one dread = two cruisers = four destroyers = 8 frigates = 16 scouts.
Anyone that has studied mathematical modeling in warfare should realize that things are not so simple, as two cruisers vs four destroyers would generally end up with the destroyers coming out ahead.
The DS AI may be dumb, but it suffices for testing this kind of scaling, and I wont be happy until the results start to follow the above ideal.
I hope this helps.
[ This Message was edited by: Drafell on 2008-05-15 10:26 ]
_________________
It's gone now, no longer here...Yet still I see, and still I fear.rnrn
rnrn
DarkSpace Developer - Retired
|
Eledore Massis [R33]
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: May 26, 2002
Posts: 2694
From: tsohlacoLocalhost
| Posted: 2008-05-15 15:27
Quote:
| On 2008-05-15 10:00, Drafell wrote:
|
|
Hope people will read this and understand the concept.
I for one am happy this finally got posted so people can star to understand instead of just giving there own thought of the current changes.
_________________
DS Discordion
|
_x$witchBladex_ [1.480 Fanboy]
Grand Admiral
Joined: February 26, 2003
Posts: 849
From: Upstate New York
| Posted: 2008-05-15 16:45
Quote:
|
On 2008-05-15 15:27, Eledore[NL] wrote:
Quote:
| On 2008-05-15 10:00, Drafell wrote:
|
|
Hope people will read this and understand the concept.
I for one am happy this finally got posted so people can star to understand instead of just giving there own thought of the current changes.
|
|
This is exactly the explanation I was looking for. This really does help out a ton in my understanding.
-Switch
_________________
* [=TB=]Enterprise @39933 sent to Clan: "Thats a lie Switch, you'd never let anyone else drink rum if it were right there. You'd slip teh roofies in and start drinking it yourself and not even realize it."
|
Bitopherous
1st Lieutenant
Joined: June 07, 2004
Posts: 264
From: Bottom of the pile
| Posted: 2008-05-16 01:18
Just because Ive always had an opinion about Dreadspace vs crappy dreads floating around space:
Ive always thought dreadnaugts were supposed to be something scary on the battlefield. Rare and powerful. Obviously, with the way our rank structure is a bit top-heavy (even moreso in this edition), this may not workout in my vision. If dreads are made something scary, everyone and their mom will fly around in them, making them not a rarity, but a bit blase.
Anywho, Ive always thought a couple of dreads showing up on the scene of a battle should be a tide-turner. Three dreads should be something that will begin mop up in a battle (of about 8-10 ships per side, probably a bigger battle too). They ought to swat smaller ships out of the sky, and be easily to deal with cruisers not flown by expert pilots (of course, the opposite is true of assault-class cruisers and crappy dread pilots).
In past versions, beams dealt a lot of damage, and were one of the more feared weapons on the battlefield. Now, they just eat energy. I use the Assault Dread of past (mostly because that was what I was most familiar with) as my example: point jumping with a dread onto anything and unloading an alpha (with all beams) would cause most ships to scram. Smaller ships circled for fear of being struck down by beam weapons. Cannons are pretty inefficient for killing things now. Torps just explode in your face or sail off because they dont track anymore.
As far as the pyramid: true. A few crusisers ought to kill a dread, or at least damage it enough to limp away. But it ought to damage at least one of those cruisers badly before it cant take anymore. same thing all the way down the pyramid.
Biggest issue with the present version: armor vs. hull values. Everyone knows it takes forever to get through the armor, and once you do, the hull dissappears rapidly. Its like an M&M. Hard shell, delicious chocalate inside. Is this being adjusted/fixed? Its a bit of a pain to not be able to get through armor.
I think Ive done a disservice to English and literatue in this post, but hopefully it is coherent enough to get the point across. If anyone has any clarity questions, PM me.
Bito
*edit* Honestly, Im not sure if I mentioned this at all in my post, but a solution to top heavy rank structure: raise requirements for dreads? There may not wind up being nearly as many floating around, at least for awhile until everyone ranks up again. Make it difficult to atain and there may be less dreads, more smaller ships making up a fleet.
[ This Message was edited by: Bitopherous on 2008-05-16 12:45 ]
_________________
What's supposed to go here again?
|
Ospolos
Grand Admiral
Joined: January 31, 2004
Posts: 567
From: ON, CANADA
| Posted: 2008-05-16 11:49
See thats the thing, I remember many moons ago when I used to fly in my assault dessie how easy it was not to get killed by a dread, so long as you stay out of its beams/torps range, cannons and missiles became the only threat unless you were point-jumped, and fighters on your tail meant get safe.
I always thought of dreads as the close range assassins, unless roled otherwise by fighters/missiles support (which are not overpowered by them, as they can be PD'd and dodged). Where, a dread can stay tanked decently from ranged shooters (cruisers/dessies) and even more so with supply ships by their side. True blockades, only breakable by other enemy dreads or mass cruisers/dessies. Those who dare engage in their small hull class and become a target would get melted by beams, and pounded by torps. Dreads should also be able to tank planet defences decently to provide a lengthy bombing support to bombers, especually since they mostley have beams.. (though, i guess that role is now the ED/PDs)
I have always thought of it as layers, with support mixed everywhere, not in a specific layer (scouts, PD/EDs are in with the support/supply):
Planet Siege: http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/7576/planetsiegeti3.jpg
Station Support: http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/7650/stationdefvk3.jpg
Battle: http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/8331/battlezf8.jpg
Planet Defence: http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/7135/planetdefqa6.jpg
Keep in mind those were just simple examples, lol...
I don't mind the pyramid, I am interested to see how it plays out later...
As for ranks, how about more advanced dessie/cruisers at the rank of FA/GA? Instead of only being rewarded more dreads/stations, more along the lines of logistics though. Like a 3 bay supply ship, super sensory scouts, better mine laying frigates, 2 build engineer ship, 5 Beam extractor, 1+ bomb slot cruiser, 15inf transport ship etc...
[ This Message was edited by: Ospolos on 2008-05-16 11:54 ]
_________________
Honoured,
Osp
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
