On 2013-04-13 16:29, Talien wrote:
Some of you seem to be forgetting that we HAD anti-Dreadnought Frigates, but they were nerfed into the ground because certain people refused to do anything about them but cry rivers on the forums until they got their way. Using your own Scouts and Frigates to drive them off has always been the most effective way of combating them aside from a beam alpha on any who are careless enough to get too close. Of course, I can easily see a Frigate armed with an upscaled Sabot with much higher damage and lower RoF being effective in such a role.

I don't think making cannons able to reliably hit smaller ships is a good way to go unless it's a new weapon that has shorter range, low damage, high speed, and high RoF like current day AA guns and fit them to the escort type ships, then use them as their intended role of ESCORTS for your Dreads/Stations and viola, you have an effective deterrant against the fast and agile "Torpedo Bombers". Something like that could easily be made to fit in with the new tier system. Missiles specifically designed to have low damage, short range, and high accuracy could also work in that role.

As far as cloak, there's never going to be a perfect way to "fix" it, as no matter what's done with it some people will be unhappy. Personally, since it's been stated numerous times that cloak is supposed to be a first strike mechanic I'd like to see it changed so if you are damaged during the cloaking process your sig resets to it's normal value, but once fully cloaked you stay that way until you decloak yourself or run out of energy. This would 100% preserve the first strike gameplay that Kluth are designed around, but make them think about how they're going to disengage beyond "I'll cloak at x% health".

On 2013-04-13 07:40, Okkam's Razor (Silenthunter13) wrote:
K'luth bashing, the old old dead horse. We all have ideas with K'luth but the main problem at the moment isn't the fact that they do high damage, can cloak and usually have a faster JD it is simply the numbers of dreads they have at their disposal.

It definately reminds me of how you should play ICC, especially the Combat Dread which is a long range broadside platform not meant to fight toe to toe close range combat. This is where K'luth again comes into an issue. Unfortunately K'luth are mainly close range and ICC are not, this means that the AD is the best option because it gives a better chance at K'luth fights.

UGTO at this moment in time counter K'luth nicely. They have close-medium range firepower and heavy armour meaning that K'luth have a tough time keeping uncloaked vs most UGTO ships (if done correctly).

ICC counter UGTO as they have range and if you cannot cloak, missiles and fighters will destroy you out-right.

K'luth beat ICC in this rock/paper/lobster fight. K'luth's cloak and inability to be located effectively by becons (which is the entire point of the useless module, forget bombing) and ICC's inability to sustain close range beam fire for very long (as they are mostly made of tin foil).

Back on subject, to conclude it isn't that K'luth are currently unfair or given a distinct advantage. As someone who flies all three races I can tell you for sure that a K'luth ship is not very survivable if you take the cloak away.

The core of the problem is the lack of balance in numbers. It kills the game in terms of team combat to have one team 7 strong (most of which dreadnaughts) and then the other with maybe 2-3 dreads and a low prestige player and the 3rd race sitting back and going "This is really damned boring, I can't do anything without being deep fried by those silly lobsters".

On 2013-04-13 23:13, Diabo|ik wrote:
If the cloak is to be nerfed like suggested here ( a hit cancels... or maybe just DELAYS recloaking? ). Then we need something to balance the defense factor of the cloak. Let's be serious, right now, if it werent for the strong cloak, we'd be flying pres.

So ok, cloak cancels or delays on weapons hit. But I want something in return for the Kluth defense wise, otherwise, no deals .

Sorry, but this is just plain wrong. UGTO have a harder time vs Kluth than ICC, because at least ICC is durable enough to withstand the initial Kluth due to the incredible protection that shields give, UGTO do not have that luxury and thus Kluth will have a much easier time shattering them on the first salvo.

On 2013-04-14 11:37, Okkam's Razor (Silenthunter13) wrote:

I admit I have not played the game for a while but there is still truth in the argument. On a related note to the UGTO gap closing ability, ICC also have a jump drive to escape to a favourable range or even using a interdictor field.

On 2013-04-14 06:12, Fluttershy wrote:

The anti-small ships as I'm thinking would be low damage and fairly short range.
It would go on something like a cruiser, and make them serve as escorts for the dreads.

Have you ever played Homeworld1? It had a balance similar to that.
-Fighters were too small, agile, and unpredictable to get hit by big gun turrets.
The fighters had a very good cost to damage ratio. Glass cannons if you will.
-Corvettes were a bit larger and slower, such that they were hit by heavy turrets easily.
The corvettes had super high velocity cannons that did a decent amount of damage with rarely ever a miss, but had a very poor cost to firepower ratio.
-Capital ships were the largest ships, couldn't evade anything, but were layered with tons of armor. These had the best cost to armor ratio.
The capital ships did a lot of damage, and had huge sums of armor, but the firepower was very clunky and only able to hit large or slow targets.

This is ignoring the special purpose ships, like drone frigates, missile destroyers (

On 2013-04-14 16:34, Sheraton wrote:
I honestly always view cruisers as knife fighting ships against dreads.

On 2013-04-14 17:03, Talien wrote:
I've always seen Cruisers as the general purpose ship that can be configured for any role, but may or may not be as effective as another ship at that role. Their strength is their versatility.