|
|
Post by resistor on Apr 24, 2019 0:40:37 GMT -5
Not sure if this a good idea, but it is interesting to think about.
Consider if craft attack-runs on enemy ships didn't take a turn to retreat if your ship is at range 1 (the craft would advance, attack, and then automatically retreat without spending a turn, allowing them to dock on the 3rd turn). The idea is that because your ship is very close to the enemy ship, crafts won't have to cross as much distance and be able to act or return in less time.
|
|
|
|
Post by fallen on Apr 24, 2019 9:47:07 GMT -5
Cool concept! Perhaps something we will do in the future. Definitely would be an incentive for bombers and shuttles.
|
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Apr 24, 2019 16:09:53 GMT -5
I think this would be a good step in the right direction. I'm finding craft to be rather inefficient especially at close range. If I can choose to fire a 2 RP autocannon and do 200 damage every turn I don't know why I would launch a bomber who is going to do 200 damage in 4 turns. I would even move it up to one less turn at range 1 or 2.
|
|
|
|
Post by fallen on Apr 24, 2019 19:49:18 GMT -5
I think this would be a good step in the right direction. I'm finding craft to be rather inefficient especially at close range. If I can choose to fire a 2 RP autocannon and do 200 damage every turn I don't know why I would launch a bomber who is going to do 200 damage in 4 turns. I would even move it up to one less turn at range 1 or 2. Interesting feedback! Craft certainly take longer but deliver more than you can get for firing a single autocannon. They grant a second guaranteed debuff on par with your capital ship talents if not often better. They also give you the chance to do more RP worth of damage than you can with any number of normal ship weapons. The point is you can fire all your autocannons on the same turn the bombers drop their bombs. Enjoy the fireworks!. |
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Apr 25, 2019 7:20:22 GMT -5
To be honest though, by the time the bomber arrives the battle is normally over. I will sometimes send the bomber in while I'm advancing because I have the extra RP, but by the time I get to close range it's just not worth it to wait three turns for delayed damage. I also, despite mine being level 6, haven't seen bombers deliver significantly more damage than my med top-of-the-line autocannon. Both hit in the mid 200's, maybe that's with weapon debuffs applied and coordinated fire, but considering I can get that damage right now and likely put another debuff on them I'll take that any day.
This all make me think that craft damage buffs need to be significantly better than ship weapons buffs. A craft buff will only deliver it's bonus once per craft (so max 4 times in 4 turns?), whereas a ship weapons buff will deliver it's bonus for every weapon for 3 or 4 turns, which means 6 to 16 times!
For the sake of argument, say I put in all hangars for bomber craft. The most ships I can have out at once is 4. Since bombing runs take 4 turns. I'm getting effectively 1 attack per turn for 3 medium and 1 large component. On the other hand, if I put 2 RP weapons in each of those slots, I could deliver 16 attacks in 4 turns. So a bomber's attack needs to be 4 times as powerful as a weapon to make it worth the turn/component cost. This would all be moot if we had unlimited component compartments, because then we could launch the bombers and spam the guns, but we don't. So we have to balance our build and committing 3 med and 1 large components to craft is going to leave us needing other slots for other things.
|
|
|
|
Post by pendell on Apr 25, 2019 10:30:33 GMT -5
* Nods * Sounds like craft in this game are experiencing the same problem as Atlantic Fleet does. In that game, I use carriers simply because I like airplanes. But from a cold cost-benefit calculation, they're not worth it in-game. It takes at least two turns to get aircraft in the air and operational, while surface ships can start shooting immediately. Carriers compound for being slow to deploy with being frighteningly vulnerable. That is a flaw in their game engine: Real Carriers are not intended to EVER be in gun range of battleships! The reason carriers dominate in the real world is because they can attack surface ships from hundreds of miles away without fear of reprisal. If a carrier starts in shooting range of an enemy ship, it has already sacrificed 90% of it's advantage in battle. Whenever battleships have engaged carriers in gun duels (The Scharnhorst attacking the Courageous, the Battle off Samar) , it has ALWAYS ended poorly for the carriers. It looks as if STF is going to have the same problem: If carriers are not overwhelmingly powerful compared to ordinary ships, no one with an eye on the credit will pay for them. It's simply not worth the sacrifice of equipment slots, personnel slots, craft purchase and upkeep when an ordinary ship can do a comparable job. On the other hand, if carriers ARE that much better, than everyone who can will buy one and no other build will be plausible in the end game, which goes against the design goal of "not breaking existing builds". I'm not exactly sure how to solve this; I don't see a reason to invest in a carrier except for role playing purposes at present. Perhaps we could have add a side-story which requires a carrier ship; that would give a reason beyond pure economics to invest in one, and die-hard carrier haters could simply skip the mission. Respectfully, Brian P. |
|
|
|
Post by fallen on Apr 25, 2019 11:24:00 GMT -5
pendell sorry to hear you've written carriers off! contributor - bombers deploy both a unpurgeable debuff and can apply Crippling Effects so I think your math on turns is wrong. I am not sure that giving less turns when you carrier reaches Range 1 is going to really matter much. By contributor's logic, by the time you could reach range 1, the battle is already over. This is slotted in low priority for consideration sometime in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Apr 25, 2019 12:01:21 GMT -5
Ok, I'm sure you've done more math than I have experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by fallen on Apr 25, 2019 12:09:28 GMT -5
Ok, I'm sure you've done more math than I have experience. Maybe just a misread on my part. After looking again, I think I was talking about something completely different. Sorry. Lots of captains strip all the weapons out of their ship and only board. I am not arguing that you have to trade weapons which can fire more often or other components to outfit a carrier. I would say that only very large ships are really viable as full on attack carriers. However, to take your case, and launch 4 bombers. On the turn that they are striking, you could feasibly deliver 16 RP worth of attacks (standard engine, 8 RP of weapons, 8 RP bombers) against the enemy ship, up to 8 Crippling Effects and at maximum 5 Debuffs (capital + 4 bomber debuffs), could score up to 8 critical hits. Yes, it is the 3rd Turn of battle. |
|
|
|
Post by pendell on Apr 25, 2019 13:26:42 GMT -5
pendell sorry to hear you've written carriers off! contributor - bombers deploy both a unpurgeable debuff and can apply Crippling Effects so I think your math on turns is wrong. I am not sure that giving less turns when you carrier reaches Range 1 is going to really matter much. By contributor 's logic, by the time you could reach range 1, the battle is already over. This is slotted in low priority for consideration sometime in the future. Perhaps a solution would be to add additional carrier-only range bands? If carriers can launch and deploy craft from well beyond torpedo engagement ranges, forcing conventional craft to burn turns getting close enough to attack them, this might tip the scales back toward them having an advantage over ordinary ships to justify their cost. Of course, tilt the balance too far and they become OP .. which, actually, is what they are in the real world. Respectfully, Brian P. |
|
|
|
Post by fallen on Apr 25, 2019 14:43:32 GMT -5
No, we will not be adding additional ranges.
Definitely suggest using Interdictors to bring down enemy torpedoes and missiles at range 5.
We're not trying mimic naval battles.
|
|
|
|
Post by tarquelne on Apr 26, 2019 6:36:42 GMT -5
I think this would be a good step in the right direction. I'm finding craft to be rather inefficient especially at close range. If I can choose to fire a 2 RP autocannon and do 200 damage every turn I don't know why I would launch a bomber who is going to do 200 damage in 4 turns. I would even move it up to one less turn at range 1 or 2. Smacking an enemy ship with a bomber every 2 turns sound fun, but I agree with your analysis of the way the game is now - I’m not sure how to justify the opportunity costs of small craft. I note the latest patch has buffs for Interdictors. In addition to any future balance changes, the big still-outstanding question for me is how small craft can be used for “overloading the damage cascade.” I get they can be used to hit an enemy ship for a lot of damage all at once, but I don’t understand the benefit of that vs. the same damage, but spread-out and earlier. My searching turned up some interesting stuff, but I’m not sure it’s current. Off the topic, but: Is there a damage reduction based on the comparison of hull points to weapon damage? Do larger weapons have longer lasting Crippling effects? (A quick test - Large to Medium Grav cannon - implies, “Yes.) I suspect the way carrier vs. non-carrier balance will shake out is that carriers will be powerful but expensive - both up-front and esp. to maintain, but that they can still be defeated by a non-carrier ... but the “paper rocks scissors” is going to be a lot more complicated than in the past. (I might characterize the meta before the recent patches as nearly one-dimensional, with “Pilot” being the only significant axis - the one that makes or breaks you ship.) |
|
|
|
Post by contributor on Apr 26, 2019 7:14:44 GMT -5
Yeah, I made a 4 bomber carrier to test some of this. I have to say that it is just kinda cool. Yeah you do get one turn where you pile serious damage on the enemy, but it's also 1 in 4 turns and the damage of bombers is really only minimally better than most med weaponry. I'm sure that a couple of grav cannons with some coordinated fire gives much more damage.
A big thing in all of this is that it also changes the early momentum of the fight. Non purgeable debuffs are good, but they may not always be hugely better than purgeable ones. The reason is that purgeable debuffs can force the enemy to choose to forego an offensive buff, which can make a huge difference. Most really challenging fights are won in the first couple of turns, even if they take much longer to complete. When facing a really challenging enemy, building a +defense buff stack while keeping them from doing the same thing is huge. Consistently hitting the enemy with debuffs is important because either they will have to clear that debuff on turn two or suffer it's ongoing effects. Every bomber launched on turn one cuts down on the chance of debuffing the enemy on the first turn. So yeah, two turns later you're going to hit them hard, but you're trading early momentum and allowing them to potentially pile on lethal buffs. Going into turn 2 with a weapon caused debuff on your ship and no debuffs on the enemy is a serious problem if it is truly dangerous opponent. Launching a bunch of craft on the first turn is a good way to ensure that possibility.
It will be interesting to see how enemy carriers affect all of this. Maybe it will add more strategic depth. For the time being though I would still need bombers to have a shorter cycle at close range and/or do more damage to see them as on par (for the component costs) with consistently hammering the enemy with weapons.
|
|
|
|
Post by pendell on Apr 26, 2019 7:30:12 GMT -5
So, a related question which will influence my use: Does the damage inflicted on a ship impact the salvage value once it is destroyed?
I ask, because I seem to get more salvage money from a ship I've captured and destroyed (Terrox Heavy Cruiser + orchestrated salvage + talents = $152K) than a ship which is almost destroyed on capture or destroyed by hull collapse ($60-$75k) .
Is that real, or just an artifact of the random number generator?
The reason I ask is if the salvage price is the same, it's reasonable to stand off at long range and pound the enemy to bits with craft or torpedoes -- provided I don't care about their cargo holds, of course.
Respectfully,
Brian P.
|
|
|
|
Post by drspendlove on Apr 26, 2019 9:26:51 GMT -5
Damaged ships tend to salvage for less and definitely ransom for less. Xeno, however, always salvage with a bonus.
|
|
