| Author |
Close range suggestions |
BoomBox
Admiral
Joined: November 06, 2010
Posts: 4
|  Posted: 2014-12-24 10:20
So I was playing as KLuth yesterday (and the day before, and the day before). Needless to say, each day a time came when my mostly unmodded parasite cruiser faced off a blue-enhanced strike cruiser.
Both ships sitting still, hull rings touching, even a depot nearby. Ideal win conditions for a "Beam Cruiser" that is shooting a "Cannon/torpedo Cruiser". Needless to say, each time I had to run away at low hull, away from the striker with its hull hardly scratched.
Now, I understand that shields have some sort of resistance to KLuth weapons and in particular ELF beams, and enhancements make the shields and weapons stronger, and that i'm a noob. Then again, I'm using a T1 beam cruiser, and at zero speed I have all the energy generation I could ask for, and the striker was receiving splash damage from its sabot rockets, variance torpedoes and ion cannons. I figured overnight that there were a fundamental and a minor changes to be introduced in favor of short range combat ships (beam ships, and also slightly torpedo).
Similar to how missiles and siege torpedoes have a minimum arming range, cannons and torpedoes should also have a min range to fire. This way, short range beam and torpedo ships can close in on their targets, and be able to deliver damage similar to how cannon and torpedo ships chase after missile ships, zeroing their damage output and leading comfortable and happy sessions of prestige gain.
The minimum range shouldAlso, to make things more palatable, this minimum range should be based off the hull level of the ship.
I propose that minimum range for weapons be as follows :-
Beams - 0% of Maximum range 
Cannons - 1x Shiplevel% of Max range
Torpedoes - 2x Shiplevel% of Max range
And as a reference value:
Missiles - 4x Shiplevel% of Max range (closely resembles and also improves upon missile arming ranges implemented at present).
And for reference, shiplevel of scout is 2, destroyer 4, dread 6 and station 10.
What this equates into as minimum range for select ships and weapons:
Beam - 0 gu. My parasite would be proud.
Cannon - 16 gu (Scout, Psi cannon), 40 gu (Destroyer, Particle cannon), 70 gu (Cruiser, Ion cannon) and 72 gu (Dread, Rail gun)
Torpedo - 10 gu (Scout, Proton torpedo), 39 gu (Destroyer, Neutronium torpedo), 75 gu (Cruiser, Sabot rocket), 48 gu (Dread, Antimatter torpedo), 144 gu (Station, Variance torpedo)
I haven't used missiles much, so only quoting a sample ship class and range:
Missiles - 300 gu (Frigate, 2000 gu), 224 gu (Destroyer, 1400 gu), 500 gu (Cruiser, 2500 gu), 360 gu (Dread, 1500 gu), 1260 gu (Station, 3150 gu).
There goes the number-heavy fundamental suggestion. One other thing I considered was the UGTO-and-KLuth auxiliary reactor. At present it just provides some energy capacity and regen rate.
It would be very interesting if a) the reactors also contributed to the ship's thrust, which in turn enhances turn rate and acceleration (top speed maybe?) b) could be replaced with some defensive gadgets, in the same spirit as the auxiliary shield gen.
Beam ships almost always have the most reactors than other ships in their class, and letting them have a thrust boost would help chase down and dogfight ships of their same class.
As for replacement options, I bring some assorted ideas:-
UGTO - Close Range Automated Perimeter Defense (CRAPD, from the flash game Starcom ^^) - Toggleable device, no energy drain, 80 gu range. Deals area damage exactly the same way as planetary defence bases do, just a bit higher to discourage stationcamping (or stations camping you).
KLuth - Energy Leech Field Projector (ELF Projector). Toggleable device, 0.5 energy/s drain, 200 gu range. Drains 1-2 energy/s from enemy ships and converts it to 0.5-1 energy for the ship. Energy drain equally distributed across all enemy ships in range.
Shredder array - Same as CRAPD, but lower range and higher damage.
Thanks for reading!
[ This Message was edited by: BoomBox on 2014-12-24 10:21 ]
_________________
|
Ignorance
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 27, 2012
Posts: 85
| Posted: 2014-12-24 20:55
I like the idea behind the arming range for the cannons, but it would make dedicated cannon dreadnoughts totally defenseless. I know some people might say "Well you're supposed to have backup and have a support fleet to circumvent that problem" but let's be honest here; Most of the time there is not any backup available to players if they need to kill something, so we at least need to make it so that beams are far less effective within, say 50gu of a ship, to counteract the arming range for cannons, so at least if a nightshade gets behind you it wont be able to give you 3 alphas then you're dead.
_________________
Lt. Commander Data: \"In the game of poker, there is a moment when a player must decide if an opponent is being deceptive, or actually holds a winning hand.\"
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2014-12-25 07:13
Trying to face tank a SC in a Parasite isn't really a good idea since it has more damage output than you do, play the circle game with it and you'll take a lot less damage. That and Sabots have no splash so it wasn't causing as much damage to itself as you suspect.
AOE damage auras on ships would remove a big part of the player competence factor (AKA skill) so I'm doubtful we'll ever see something like that, Flux Wave is probably as close as we'll get to that sort of thing.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
Zero28
Grand Admiral
Joined: August 25, 2006
Posts: 591
| Posted: 2014-12-25 22:57
Arming cannon range?
Understand that kluth nearly operate most effectivly at close range combat, And you asking to make any cannon/torpedo ship litterly useless agaisnt them at this point
this is the perfect idea if you want Nothing but beam battles and god Knows whos the best at using beams
_________________
19:33:51 [ZION]GothThug {C?}: "Zero..you are DS's hero"
|
Kinthalas
Chief Marshal
Army Of Darkness
Joined: January 01, 2003
Posts: 60
| Posted: 2014-12-25 23:26
I've been gone a long time.. but just a heads up, that ICC strike cruiser and toe to toe some dreads with shield rotation 
It's their t3 cruiser, and is well worth the work it takes to earn it!
[ This Message was edited by: Kinthalas on 2014-12-25 23:27 ]
_________________
|
Incinarator
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 24, 2010
Posts: 237
| Posted: 2014-12-26 01:47
Have all of my nope. You cite one of the few times a cannon ship will trash a beam ship of equal class. Two equal skill pilots with no enh will duel closely to the death in parasite vs strike, so your experience is so-so. I like the idea of a minimum range for cannons and torpedoes in principle, but if that was implemented a damage buff would have to come with it to compensate.
As for your aux replacements and change ideas... I like the ability to replace. Buffing the devices themselves, not so much. Beam ships could swap aux gens for a ship-limited maneuverability boost (like the command aura) , but having that come WITH the power is too much.
More reasonable replacements for the auxgens would be:
UGTO: Armor boost. It increases the base armor amount at the cost of speed. I'd prefer it wasn't a damage reduction.
K'luth: Afterburner. It increases base ship speed but decreases maneuverability.
_________________
I be rebuilding your planets!
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2014-12-27 12:53
Quote:
On 2014-12-25 07:13, Talien wrote:
Trying to face tank a SC in a Parasite isn't really a good idea since it has more damage output than you do, play the circle game with it and you'll take a lot less damage. That and Sabots have no splash so it wasn't causing as much damage to itself as you suspect.
|
Talien has the right of it here. A Strike Cruiser has 48 points to spend on weapons, while a Parasite only has 22. Doing some of the math, I believe you may have still been out-damaging him in terms of raw DPS--K'Luth beams are just that powerful.
ICC Strike Cruiser:
Ion Cannon: 2400 DPS (x3)
Variance Torpedo: 3000 DPS (this is the only one that has splash damage, incidentally)
SABOT Rocket: 500 DPS (x8)
Total: 14200 DPS
K'Luth Parasite:
Assault Disruptor: 4000 DPS (x2)
ELF Beam: 1000 DPS vs Shields (x4)
Disruptor: 1000 DPS (x6)
Total: 18000 DPS
This assumes optimal damage output for all weapons--no falloff, no missing, no bad rolls on the random damage, etc.
However, the Strike Cruiser is one of those ICC ships with a double layer of shields, which makes it an extremely strong tank, while K'Luth armor is the weakest in the game and can't be re-directed like shields can.
If you have to fight a Strike Cruiser in a Parasite again, you want to get in behind him. His firepower is focused-forward; only four of his SABOT Rockets/Fusion Torpedoes can fire to the sides, and nothing but his PD beams can fire aft. Get in behind him and stay there. Don't just sit in front of his guns and let yourself get hammered; K'Luth ships can't do that nearly as well as UGTO or ICC ones.
And one other thing to note: I maintain that the strongest ship isn't a Tier 1, or a Tier 3, or one with blue Enh. It's one that's working as part of a team. Just one other ship in the fight on your side could've probably turned the tide of that fight.
[ This Message was edited by: Jim Starluck on 2014-12-27 12:55 ]
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Fluttershy
Fleet Admiral
Joined: September 24, 2011
Posts: 778
From: Fluttershy
| Posted: 2014-12-27 15:03
T1 is supposed to have superior weapon arcs, right?
If the Parasite has more firepower on the sides than the Strike Cruiser, then perhaps that is where they excel?
Try staying away from their forward arcs at all costs, though that can be difficult because they have a superior turn rate, just do whatever you can to make it a broadsiding match.
_________________
|
BoomBox
Admiral
Joined: November 06, 2010
Posts: 4
| Posted: 2014-12-28 07:31
I thank all of you for your valuable opinions and suggestions, especially Jim sir for his professional input - in hindsight, I think I had been becoming impatient in my play style and tried to maximize my own ship's damage output instead of reducing my opponent's.
Indeed, parasites fire some 3-4 disruptors to their side arcs, and combined with damage from some rapid-cycle disruptors (combat beams in their own right), a parasite would deliver twice the damage of a strike cruiser in a broad-side heavy dogfight.
With respect to my arming range suggestion, I had thought it up to force cannon and torpedo ships to be wary of combat at very short ranges, and make efforts to adhere to their ranges - long range for cannons, medium for torpedoes and short for beams. That was certainly an indirect way of mine, asking for a bonus for beam ships that get extremely close to other kind of ships, and I am sorry for doing so. I had not considered a damage upgrade to the weapons taking a nerf, as the arming ranges would have be small comparable to their maximum ranges. But I guess there would be a better, and indeed less penalizing, system where guns with 1400 gu range and torpedoes firing out to 750 gu would become inferior to beams having 250 gu range in appropriate conditions.
I guess I also became overambitious at the same time, by trying to rake in benefits for the nightshades and mandibles that could get within the arming range of station grade torpedoes. They would still be hittable by the beams, though.
As for auxiliary reactors also providing engine boosts, it seems I missed out on quoting an equivalent to the current system. I had hoped for them to provide a one-fifth or less fraction of an IE engine's thrust. Such a value could have worked out for the better, given most ships have either 1 or 2 reactors. The alternatives I suggested were also poor, and Incinarator sir's ideas seem a very good and balanced improvement for the game.
Happy new years! And again, thank you for your time!
_________________
|
Fluttershy
Fleet Admiral
Joined: September 24, 2011
Posts: 778
From: Fluttershy
| Posted: 2014-12-28 11:56
It's not THAT bad of an idea, really.
The thing is, though...
Torpedoes have Splash which hurts at close range, and Sabots are just such a low DPS, high-spike weapon that it doesn't matter in a close up extended fight.
Cannons are just plain weak, but consistent. The only reason those 2 ion cannons hurt is because it is roughly equivalent to 8 smaller cannons, and more restricted arcs lends itself to heavier forward firepower. They're probably the most flexible weapon in the game, but just don't have the firepower to stand up to close range
Also, K'Luth has weaker defenses compared to the ICC, if I'm not mistaken.
_________________
|
FireswordIII
Vice Admiral
We Kick Arse
Joined: December 12, 2012
Posts: 15
| Posted: 2014-12-29 15:06
Considering UGTO would be so horrifically screwed over and it would give kluth such an advantage I propose a counter idea: Artillery cannons. These have say a 100 gu arming distance. Usable on stats and dreads. Slighlty lower speed than you factions main cannon (particle/rail/psi) deals greatly increased damage but definielty NOT core. still able to hit cruisers fairly reliably. Pretty much can never hit a dessy or smaller. Gives dreads a more damaging weapon to make dread vs dread or stat vs stat fights faster, gives ultra close range ships a wider range of use, makes more vaiety to weapon loadouts
_________________
|
Bardiche
Chief Marshal
Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1247
| Posted: 2014-12-30 10:41
Jim is new to this, let me help.
Quote:
On 2014-12-27 12:53, Jim Starluck wrote:
And one other thing to note: I maintain that the strongest ship isn't a Tier 1, or a Tier 3, or one with a team. It's one that's got the most blue enh. If you'd spent $100 more you would've probably won. Buy more enhancements.
|
Man, what kind of gamedev doesn't suggest throwing money at the screen for everything?
Idly, ICC ships are pretty friggin' strong in one-on-one combat but if you retry this exercise against UGTO, better results should be achieved. Not all ICC shields have resistance to beams.
_________________
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2014-12-30 11:33
Quote:
On 2014-12-30 10:41, Bardiche wrote:
Jim is new to this, let me help.
Quote:
On 2014-12-27 12:53, Jim Starluck wrote:
And one other thing to note: I maintain that the strongest ship isn't a Tier 1, or a Tier 3, or one with a team. It's one that's got the most blue enh. If you'd spent $100 more you would've probably won. Buy more enhancements.
|
Man, what kind of gamedev doesn't suggest throwing money at the screen for everything?
|
They don't pay me well enough for that.
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
