|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2014 16:15:21 GMT -5
Well, no matter what we decide there will be a lot of testing and balancing before we change anything. The rallying cry that Transports are better than all other ships concerns me because, if true, it would make the game very dull. That's a matter of opinion. Offensively, heavy carriers may be best but defensively they are not. They provide a smaller durability bonus, can only carry one weapon, and can only have one armament that only gives offensive bonuses. I generally stick to carriers and battlecruisers because of repair, increased hull, and torpedos. If you are that concerned, what if you made two different type of troop upgrades: one that only applies to invasion and one that applies to all gun? Make current troop upgrades significantly more massive, and then make some light mass, invasion-only troops. This way, transports still have the advantage of RGs and troops, but the increased mass of troops leads to less armor and lower level, making battlecruisers and heavy carriers more favorable. And players who use transports for combat are still happy because their transports remain just as powerful, but with slightly decreased armor and level capacities. Just to confirm though Cory Trese, the current gun attack and damage bonuses for troops applies equally to invasion and ship to ship combat?
|
|
|
Post by Awesomdary on Dec 14, 2014 18:23:07 GMT -5
Well, no matter what we decide there will be a lot of testing and balancing before we change anything. The rallying cry that Transports are better than all other ships concerns me because, if true, it would make the game very dull. they aren't THAT good but they are a nice addition to a defending force, the main bulk of my attacking force is still fighters, carriers and heavy carriers, which reminds me there are still some useless techs giving torp bonus to ships without torps (some structure I think it is...) I personally hate cruises... They bring nothing to the fight that my fighters and carriers can't... ((Yep heavy carrier is still getting hypersonic attack bonuses on structure, and can equip no torps))
|
|
|
Post by Awesomdary on Dec 14, 2014 18:51:11 GMT -5
Every time this comes up I deeply regret giving Transports the ability to mount any type of non-invasion weapons. It was a mistake. I'm tempted to just fix it, but I know that would badly break a lot of people's games. I guess I will just slowly keep nerfing Transports -- starting with Troops for non-Invasion / non-Boarding combat. Honestly, they are fine, it is not them that needs a nerf, we need a ship that can be re-fueled, and pack a punch, and have atleast 21 hp/durability, something that can use structure and either crew or bridge, and have some good armor, and we need it for the mid game, not the late stages (so before the heavyc carrier preferably) perhaps a Light Battleship or something? P.S. The problem really came up around the time carriers couldn't refuel each other, and a huge gap needed to be filled... I won't send a ship back to spend 10-20 turns refueling and have another ship have to take it's place if I can avoid it, and I don't want to lose a ship and replace it... So the choice landed on the transport with it's decent hp buffer and ability to fit a decent gun, it became my mainline defence for taking out missile ships and blockading world killers...
|
|
|
Post by En1gma on Dec 14, 2014 18:53:23 GMT -5
I won't lie and say I'm torn about this one. I think they should get fixed. Transport ships shouldn't be able to have combat capabilities anywhere near anything else. They're for planetary operations. They excel at this, and shouldn't be be good at anything else, imo. Having to use the onboard weapon systems should be absolutely last ditch, not priority for anyone. If you're attacking the xeno, you *should* have- and be using- a fleet to back up your planetary assault ships.
|
|
|
Post by Officer Genious on Dec 14, 2014 19:11:01 GMT -5
I won't lie and say I'm torn about this one. I think they should get fixed. Transport ships shouldn't be able to have combat capabilities anywhere near anything else. They're for planetary operations. They excel at this, and shouldn't be be good at anything else, imo. Having to use the onboard weapon systems should be absolutely last ditch, not priority for anyone. If you're attacking the xeno, you *should* have- and be using- a fleet to back up your planetary assault ships. Err, wait, you can use Military Transports as Destroyers? Lol I was never aware of this, and I solely used Military Transports for invading Xeno planets. The only issue with doing so is that its frickin' expensive and slow as hell to fight even theTutorial Xeno planets, and I was fielding 3 of them at one to take out just two planets (my Templar accountant cried bloody murder at the cost). Xeno simply don't take much planetary damage once they've been there for a while, and even though I wanted new planets I got tired of them simply rebuilding before I could kick them out that I simply grouped my transports at one planet a time and bombed it to oblivion.
|
|
|
Post by Awesomdary on Dec 14, 2014 19:13:43 GMT -5
In the late game I don't use transports for dps, instead high evasion fighters run down stragglers and blocking any ships from attacking your transports while they are invading (setup with low durability and high invasion/repair, and the biggest armor that fits with angel pods) and carriers lay down torpedoes from behind and refuel/repair your ships, and I rotate in carriers on a as needed basis...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2014 21:06:49 GMT -5
Well, no matter what we decide there will be a lot of testing and balancing before we change anything. The rallying cry that Transports are better than all other ships concerns me because, if true, it would make the game very dull. they aren't THAT good but they are a nice addition to a defending force, the main bulk of my attacking force is still fighters, carriers and heavy carriers, which reminds me there are still some useless techs giving torp bonus to ships without torps (some structure I think it is...) I personally hate cruises... They bring nothing to the fight that my fighters and carriers can't... ((Yep heavy carrier is still getting hypersonic attack bonuses on structure, and can equip no torps)) +1 on the useless structures. There's even one that gives +10 alpha damage and +1 torpedo attack, which makes no sense considering alpha damage is only for guns. That would be like a new precision barrage operation providing +gun damage and +torpedo attack. I do disagree though that cruisers provide no purpose. Crusiers have the potential to be much better offensively and defensively than the carrier, as railguns are more powerful than lances, plating gives more armor than barriers, and there are prow and propulsion upgrades that give good gun and damage bonuses. Between battlecruisers and heavy carriers its more even, with heavy carriers getting the better weapon and battlecruisers getting better offensive armaments. However, battlecruisers can easily equip KK torpedoes, and combined with the right armaments can kill any enemy in one shot and counter any attack from any range. Battlecruisers, with weapons that demand only 2AP, can have 3MP reactors and hence have the potential to be much faster than heavy carriers. Sure, I think carriers and heavy carriers are better also because they can repair and refuel, but cruisers and battlecruisers have their place in a well-balanced fleet.
|
|
|
Post by Brutus Aurelius on Dec 14, 2014 21:28:31 GMT -5
they aren't THAT good but they are a nice addition to a defending force, the main bulk of my attacking force is still fighters, carriers and heavy carriers, which reminds me there are still some useless techs giving torp bonus to ships without torps (some structure I think it is...) I personally hate cruises... They bring nothing to the fight that my fighters and carriers can't... ((Yep heavy carrier is still getting hypersonic attack bonuses on structure, and can equip no torps)) +1 on the useless structures. There's even one that gives +10 alpha damage and +1 torpedo attack, which makes no sense considering alpha damage is only for guns. That would be like a new precision barrage operation providing +gun damage and +torpedo attack. I do disagree though that cruisers provide no purpose. Crusiers have the potential to be much better offensively and defensively than the carrier, as railguns are more powerful than lances, plating gives more armor than barriers, and there are prow and propulsion upgrades that give good gun and damage bonuses. Between battlecruisers and heavy carriers its more even, with heavy carriers getting the better weapon and battlecruisers getting better offensive armaments. However, battlecruisers can easily equip KK torpedoes, and combined with the right armaments can kill any enemy in one shot and counter any attack from any range. Battlecruisers, with weapons that demand only 2AP, can have 3MP reactors and hence have the potential to be much faster than heavy carriers. Sure, I think carriers and heavy carriers are better also because they can repair and refuel, but cruisers and battlecruisers have their place in a well-balanced fleet. I agree about the Cruisers and Battlecruisers. They are necessary for the heavy lifting of the Fleet. Battlecruisers can equip the most powerful ranged and close ranged weapons in the game and still have room for well balanced upgrades and armors. I use Fighters for swarm tactics, weakening enemy ships and making them easy targets for Torpedo Cruisers. Railgun Cruisers I use for planetary defense, Transport escorts, securing the area around Xeno colonies, and mopping up Xeno ships after my offensive fleet ops.
|
|
|
Post by Cory Trese on Dec 14, 2014 22:55:59 GMT -5
alpha damage is only for guns => false
---
All military capital ships (not fighters or transports) get a huge set of bonuses from XP, which makes them the most effective long term fleet element.
Heavy Reactor ships excel at defense because of their impressive repair and refuel rates. They also maximize maint credits by having the lowest overall minimum maintenance adjustment score. A Battlecruiser can get down under 60% maintenance.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2014 23:20:09 GMT -5
alpha damage is only for guns => false --- All military capital ships (not fighters or transports) get a huge set of bonuses from XP, which makes them the most effective long term fleet element. Heavy Reactor ships excel at defense because of their impressive repair and refuel rates. They also maximize maint credits by having the lowest overall minimum maintenance adjustment score. A Battlecruiser can get down under 60% maintenance. I knew it!! You and fallen have always only stated that XP helps for criticals, and that has been the only thing stated in the library and the help. But deep down, I just KNEW that there were some hidden XP bonuses that you weren't telling anyone. I knew it all along!
|
|
|
Post by Awesomdary on Dec 15, 2014 6:24:41 GMT -5
alpha damage is only for guns => false --- All military capital ships (not fighters or transports) get a huge set of bonuses from XP, which makes them the most effective long term fleet element. Heavy Reactor ships excel at defense because of their impressive repair and refuel rates. They also maximize maint credits by having the lowest overall minimum maintenance adjustment score. A Battlecruiser can get down under 60% maintenance. But still... what use is the torp attack bonus, on ships that can't equip torps??? Structure can only be used by Heavy Carriers currently and Heavy Carriers cannot equip Torpedos... Yet, 2 Structures give Torp attack bonus... sense: it makes none!
|
|
|
Post by Brutus Aurelius on Dec 15, 2014 6:28:34 GMT -5
alpha damage is only for guns => false --- All military capital ships (not fighters or transports) get a huge set of bonuses from XP, which makes them the most effective long term fleet element. Heavy Reactor ships excel at defense because of their impressive repair and refuel rates. They also maximize maint credits by having the lowest overall minimum maintenance adjustment score. A Battlecruiser can get down under 60% maintenance. But still... what use is the torp attack bonus, on ships that can't equip torps??? Structure can only be used by Heavy Carriers currently and Heavy Carriers cannot equip Torpedos... Yet, 2 Structures give Torp attack bonus... sense: it makes none! I believe that there are ships still in the works that will benefit from those bonuses.
|
|
|
Post by En1gma on Dec 15, 2014 8:45:44 GMT -5
I feel like this thread has been visited by ntsheep and we didn't even know it.
|
|
|
Post by Cory Trese on Dec 15, 2014 9:26:26 GMT -5
alpha damage is only for guns => false --- All military capital ships (not fighters or transports) get a huge set of bonuses from XP, which makes them the most effective long term fleet element. Heavy Reactor ships excel at defense because of their impressive repair and refuel rates. They also maximize maint credits by having the lowest overall minimum maintenance adjustment score. A Battlecruiser can get down under 60% maintenance. But still... what use is the torp attack bonus, on ships that can't equip torps??? Structure can only be used by Heavy Carriers currently and Heavy Carriers cannot equip Torpedos... Yet, 2 Structures give Torp attack bonus... sense: it makes none! Thanks for the feedback. Upgrades are categorized into groups and the groups are associated with ships. Hopefully that helps!
|
|
|
Post by Cory Trese on Dec 15, 2014 9:26:48 GMT -5
alpha damage is only for guns => false --- All military capital ships (not fighters or transports) get a huge set of bonuses from XP, which makes them the most effective long term fleet element. Heavy Reactor ships excel at defense because of their impressive repair and refuel rates. They also maximize maint credits by having the lowest overall minimum maintenance adjustment score. A Battlecruiser can get down under 60% maintenance. I knew it!! You and fallen have always only stated that XP helps for criticals, and that has been the only thing stated in the library and the help. But deep down, I just KNEW that there were some hidden XP bonuses that you weren't telling anyone. I knew it all along! It was added in 1.6.9
|
|