ahh, i see where you got confused, yeah, i meant things that are currently unbuffed. i just threw those 2 in off the top of my head, i didnt necessarily mean those two.

anyway, are you still on camp atm or what? any ETA on another ship design?

finally, im pretty much out of original ideas atm, i think the SotLs just need to be balanced and fleshed out with numbers and what not, is there anything else i can do to help with the mod? perhaps i can try my hand at some modelling or skinning? do you know where i can get a good (hopefully free) program for that?

Oh, was thinking about SC just now and came up with some things...

Interceptor [TEC]

Ships Per Squad: 3

Ship DPS: 8

Ship Hull: 45

Damage Type: AVL

Weapon Type: Autocannon

Abilities:

[Automatic] Escort: Reduces the damage taken by nearby (within a range of 1000) SC by 40%

[Researchable] Missile Swarm: Damages up to 6 enemy SC in range (2000) for 30/60 (dependent on research level) damage

Notes: The normal TEC fighter would get bumped to using lasers.

Interceptor [Vasari]

Ships Per Squad: 2

Ship DPS: 14

Ship Hull: 70

Damage Type: AVL 

Weapon Type: Pulse Cycler

Abilities:

[Automatic] Covering Fire: Reduces the damage dealt by enemy SC within range (1000) by 50%

[Researchable] Dormant Nanites: deals no damage to the SC itself but upon docking with its carrier (working on how to code this) instills a stacking DoT of 15 DPS for 20 seconds

Notes: Normal Fighters get Wave Cannons

Interceptor [Advent]

Ships Per Squad: 5

Ship DPS: 4

Ship Hull: 23

Damage Type: AVL

Weapon Type: Laser

Abilities:

[Researchable] Telekinetic Shield: Reduces damage taken by 40% and returns 250% of the damage to the attacker

Notes: Fighters would get bumped to plasma

Heavy Bomber [TEC]

Ships Per Squad: 2

Ship DPS: 10

Ship Hull: 60

Damage Type: AVH

Weapon Type: Missile

Abilities:

[Automatic] Careful Delivery: Increases DPS by 30% but decreases speed by 25%.

[Researchable] Hull Crusher Torpedo: deals 150 damage to target ship (CD: 360 seconds)

Notes: None

Heavy Bomber [Vasari]

Ships Per Squad: 1

Ship DPS: 25

Ship Hull: 140

Damage Type: AVH

Weapon Type: Pulse Beam Cannon

Abilities:

[Automatic] Load AM: Increases damage dealt by 100% but increases damage received by 60%.

[Researchable] Micro Phase Manipulation: Passively reduces speed of enemy SC within range (3000) by 30%

Notes: None

Heavy Bomber [Advent]

Ships Per Squad: 3

Ship DPS: 6.5

Ship Hull: 35

Damage Type: AVH

Weapon Type: "Plasma"

Abilities:

[Automatic] Telekinetic Bursts: causes all ships hit by this to recoil a slight amount.

[Researchable] Destructive Telekinetic Bursts: Causes target ships to receive a 4 DPS DoT for 20 seconds.

Notes: The thing would not actually appear to fire plasma, but for the sake of coding it would...

A few general things to note:

Interceptors have VL armor

Heavy Bombers have L armor

Each race would have a "upgrade SC weapons" researchable that would unlock abilities on ALL their SC.  So, for the TEC, the I's would get MS, the F's: Flares, the B's: something I haven't come up with, the HB's: Hull Crushers.  That way you don't burn a ton of money on them all...  Or perhaps have one upgrade for the I and F abilities and one for B and HB...  Just an idea...

At any rate, what do you think of the SC ideas now that they are finally put down in text?

Okay...  I'll explain some stuff...

Dormant Nanites: What it does is remove the effectiveness of hit-and-run as it causes carriers to receive DoT's when their SC dock with them.  For lore, the rounds contain small amounts of nanites that wait until they are inside the carrier and then go on a feeding frenzy.

Missiles Swarm: But the other ones have equally powerful abilities...  This one is just direct combat...  Perhaps nerf the damage though...

Tele Shield: But the thing has a damage redux of 50%.  The idea was to apply this first.  That way, it only reflects 125% of the intended inflicted damage...

Load AM: The idea here is that the ships start putting AM into their missiles so they become more powerful.  However, having AM in an undefended missile on the edge of your ship is also dangerous.  Hence the damage income buff...

Hull Crushers would get a 25% damage buff vs hull.

I like the Psionic Burst idea...  That was what I was going for...  I really need to get entrenchment...

As far as the researchables go, that works...  And I don't know what to do with bombers...  Perhaps change them into gunships like they are in reality and give them some AA guns...  Just a thought...  That way, the Interceptors and HB's deal heavy damage, the fighter is average, and the Gunship/Bomber has lots of health.

We are NOT, I repeat NOT, scrapping TT's/BPSC's.  This is just something else to add...  I was talking about SC in something else and got to thinking about this...

Okay...  Sorry about the formation thing...  Yes, I want it...

As far as decreasing bombers/squad, idk...  I like it as one...  It has a ton of health, so...

But above all, the Dormant Nanites are OFFENSIVE!!!!!!!!!   They don't nerf the Vasari, they give a them a HUGE buff!  It makes the Vasari better at countering hit-and-run.  Look...

Vas ISC shoots at TEC FSC.

V ISC instills a status on the T FSC.

Battle Rages

At the end of the battle, the TEC start losing and retreat.

The T FSC park on their carrier for phase jump.

The T FSC instill their own carrier with a DoT

The TEC carrier begins taking damage.

TEC carrier ends up with a lot of damage.

Now does it make sense?!?!?!?  It is arguably the BEST of the three!  Not the worst!  Against an Aeria, this would be devastating since the debuffs stack.

Now that that's over...

As far as LAM goes, I know..  I just didn't want them getting a free pass to use 200% damage.

And I was trying to think of something else for the A ISC, but I ended up with nothing...

Yeah, I need to change the OP...

relax... i see now, i was under the impression it was a passive against the Vas itself, no, thats very good...

except its useless during the battle unless the Enemy SC dock with their carriers during battle... its a very situational thing... if SC were required to dock every once in a while for reloading or refueling or something, then it would be good, because the effects of the damage would be felt during the battle.

As for A ISC... if its possible, what about some sort of short term... i forget the name... the ability that lets you take over a targetted ship? something like that that causes Enemy SC to fire on friendly targets for a short while? maybe while also damaging the SC itself if possible? or maybe just some sort of simple DoT that damages the SC while reducing RoF etc... the latter is quite simple and i think would do the trick if balanced properly...

i was just playing a game of Sins... and i realised that until you get up to HC's, LF are your main 'cannon fodder' front line troops as it were... since HC's are generally like what? level 5-6 tech, thats means its a very long time between the two...

my original idea of the destroyer was to drop the HC down a few tiers and replace its preent level with a non-cap destroyer type thing. as it stands though, i think some sort of fleet filler, hopefully with a 360 degree or close firing arc could be a good addition to standard play. this way HC's fill the gap between LF's and HC's now, and the new "Gunboat/Gunship" or Super Heavy Cruiser replaces current location HC's. i just feel that most of Sins ships fall into some sort of utility or specialty classification (for instance, carriers come in to the game pretty early... except i would think that in the early stages of a game you should still be running up and hitting things with sticks, not instantly tech-ing up to the point where you can hit anythign in a grav well, and can be virtually unopposed unless your enemy has many flak frigs or fighters with which to counter you). the unmodded version tries to compensate for this by making LC insanely expensive, so even more so, why would you spend the credits on such ships when you dont really have the economy to support it yet?
And in any case, Carriers are the counter for LRF right? because of the even greater range of SC... wouldnt it make sense that HC's be the counter for LRF (i think they already are, but they are brought out WAY too late), given  that most of them have some sort of speed enhancing ability, or at least the armor to withstand an LRF assault, and then the close range weapons to take them out quickly... the more i think about it, the more sense it makes to me. then SC (bombers specifically) can be a counter to HC's (again, i think they already are) due to their extended range and harrassing ability.

so long story short. maybe move Carriers and Flak up a tier respectively, and move HC down... or leave Carriers where they are and bring in HC one tier up from Carriers per race... im not sure exactly... bringing in HC's as early as carriers are currently seems like too much, but moving carriers 2 tiers up also seems too much...

idn, what do you think?

well, I have a mod idea called 'Space Superiority', that makes SC a spawnable frigate (and it costs RESOURCES, ooh!, aah!), and the SC have abilties like 'Cluster Bombs' 'Afterburners' 'Laser Designation' 'Incendiary Shells' 'ECM Suite' etc. etc. And that's just the TEC's abilities.

I think you would like some of the Vasari SC ideas for it. Here's two.

Phase Manipulators- these little guys are despatched in a 2-fighter squadron (their specialists, whatdya expect?), and carry a number of support abilities. In some ways, these things are like fighter versions of the Stilakas, but they also have Phase Drive jamming gear that can be upgraded to stop Phase Jumps altogether. This is only OUT of the well, not into it. PMs would be a researchable SC type, probably about the same tier as the Subverter.

Stealth Fighter- the shining glory of Vasari SC design, Stealth Fighters are INDETECTABLE. These come out about the same time as the Jikara's Selective Phasing ability.

Interceptor- these are basically fighters but with Pulse Guns (sweet)

There are some others. The Vasari version of TEC Afterburners is 'Gravitational Distortion', while the Advent would have 'Telekinetic Acceleration'. TA would have the worst turn rate penalty, while Afterburners has the lowest. GD doesn't have a turn rate penalty, but instead has a slight (10%) bonus. GD however doesn't offer as much maximum speed, but does offer slightly better acceleration.

all very good!

just with the TEC BSC, the Frag Rounds ability... that applies to what? their AA Cannons or their main Anti-Ship weapons? i know it says all weapons, but... are you saying the standard missile fired at a frigate or larger also does damage to SC in addition to their AA Guns?

also... with TEC FSC... i thought Fighters were Anti-Light? or Anti-Medium? why are we giving them a boost against Caps? i would have thought with Bombers and Heavy Bombers (ill come back to the names for those two later) being strong against caps, why are we now giving a mainly Anti-SC ship a buff vs cap ships?

otherwise, everything else sounds good. Chink in the Armor as an ability name sounds too long, perhaps Weak Point Targetting or something similar. Imo, with ability and research names, the fewer definiate and indefinate articles (like "in" and "the") the better.

Now, with bomber names... i think we need to keep one as a Bomber... its only if we have Bomber and Heavy Bomber that it becomes convoluted. I like Heavy Bomber, but i also like Torpedo Bomber... on the other hand, im not so sure a Bomber with Aft-AA cannons constitutes a Gunship, and id rather keep that name for my other idea about HC's a few posts above.

So... im happy with Bomber and Torpedo Bomber, or Heavy Bomber and Torpedo Bomber... Maybe Light/Medium Bomber and Heavy Torpedo Bomber... lets discuss it, but i really want its meaning to be intrinsically evident. So the current "Bomber" is effective vs All ships larger than a Frigate + structures and Starbases, but Heavy Bombers are more effective vs Caps and Structures/Starbases than normal Bombers, and i want the names to reflect that somehow.

Also, remember i wanted to incorporate the EWS Bombers from Distant Stars. i think they are special craft and so need a special ship to carry them. as it stands, in DiSt, only Hangar Defenses and Cap Ships can field EWS Bombers, but since we now have at least 4 types of SC, not including EWS Bombers, they may end up being obsolete before they are given a chance.

In General, im proposing (in addition to the EWS Bombers) a new kind of carrier, either a Utility Cruiser Type, or a new Cap Carrier... something that, with research, comes out later in the game with much better Abilities and DPS, in addition to its SC power. Im just putting it on the table now, ill work on it more if you guys give the thumbs up.

Yeah, i had a feeling the temp control of SC wouldnt work (you could always take control of it permanently, and have it exist as a squadron without a host, so for as long as they exist without a host normally, they fight against your enemies for you...), anyway, so the latter, just a simple thing that reduces SC speed, accuracy, maybe RoF, and causes DoT. should be simple to implement for Advent ISC. the explanation would be Telekinetic Forces are applied to the enemy SC, causing the SC to shake itself apart while reducing speed and accuracy.

I also like Whiskey's ideas for SC, notably the Phase Manipulators and Afterburners and equivalents. I think Volt pretty much set everything out, so i cant see any SC that still need buffs, but they're on the table. Maybe something for the EWS if we choose to improve upon them.

As for the Phase Manipulators, it would be good.... except having something so powerful on something as elusive and possibly widespread as an SC is seriously OP. i mean, you fill a few carriers with these things, have them hold position on the edge of an enemy GW with some Flak support, and the enemy cant retreat. even if it has a set range, you set them up behind your fleet but within range of the enemies escape route, and bam...

However, this idea as a cruiser or cap ship ability would be good. like a Mobile Phase Disruptor... however if i remember correctly, i suggested that SotL's have such an ability built in as a passive ability... idn, what do you think Volt?

as for stealth fighters, i think its a nice idea, but it doesnt fill a niche, and any ability to balance it would end up negating the effect entirely.

also:

i like this idea much better than the current Dormante Nanites. sure, DN as it is now is good against Hit and Run, but during a battle it is useless... maybe give that to SC in Hangar Defenses, but not on LCs.

what are UT's again? are you talking about the New Utility Cruiser? and in any case. Utility Cruisers are traditionally only lightly armed, and the TT is unarmed, so we've gained two new Utility Ships, and still have no grunt fighters. One thing i did think of a while ago, though, was a "Dead Zone" in the LRF firing arc, so it couldnt fire at targets within a range of 50 or so, or else give them a 50% damage nerf to targets within a distance of 50... that way they are long range and STAY long range.

Anyway, i just thought of something RE: the dormant nanites and defending SC... Do we want to make a new SC fielded exclusively by Hangar Defenses? if could have greater damage and speed, as well as abilities to make it the bane of attacking fleets. its more vs the annoying single ships you sometimes get in undefended worlds rather than whole fleets, though they could still wreak havoc on a fleet...

Im thinking something about 2-3 times the size of a standard SC, with 360 degree AA cannons, heavy weapons for attacking larger ships, and perhaps abilities like the EWS Bomber, so it can disrupt the abilities of targetted ships. heres and overview:

'Defender' Gunship:

Ships Per Squad: 2

Ship DPS: 10

Ship Hull: 40

Damage Type: Anti-Composite (is that where it damages all types?)

Weapon Type: AutoCannons and Missiles

Abilities:

[Auto] EMP Blasts: Causes Temporary Engine Shutdown and reduces Rof/Range/Accuracy on targetted enemy ships

[Researchable] ECM Suite: Reduces Accuracy of nearby SC by 30% and increases Armor by 1

Forgive the numbers, i just threw them in, they can be changed, but thats the idea. The picture i have in my head atm looks alot like a 747 or B-52 Bomber... but of course a 747 or B-52 in space would look silly, so im more than happy to change it.

The idea is to simply have one all-rounder ship that is too big to be fielded by ships, but can be housed by Hangar Defenses, and used to defend your worlds against any and all threats. They would take up two command points (hangar slots) but Hangar defenses would have their command points increased to compensate. As for SB's... im not sure if i want to make Defender Gunships the standard on SB's, or give the player a choice of which SC he wants... however, SB command points would stay the same as normal. for instance, a fully upgraded TEC SB has 14 squadrons, so if you were to fill those with Defender Gunships, you would only get 7 Squadrons.

Im looking at it though and i think maybe they are too powerful... i want the weapons as they are, but i may want to reduce the speed and turning speed to that of standard bombers...

and lastly, before i forget, i want to mention it here that i want all the new abilities and ships and research items we are creating to have their own unique button image, and not steal it from another part of the game. the thing i hate most about poorly designed mods is when they steal things from other races and slap it into another race as is, just because it fits...

also, Volt, how are you going with the Models? i know you had the Kamrock all but done, barring the changes we wanted to make to the wings/fan. and you had the Nolane all but done, except we were thinking about swapping the Nolane Model with the Eyron and doing something different for the Nolane... so basically, how are you going? you might want to post some on the OP just so we know what we have down pat already

it's not ANTICOMPOSITE, it's just COMPOSITE. What you want is actually CAPITALSHIP damage, as that does a 100% (full damage, no more/less) to everything.

Also, one way of balancing something like PMs is to have them as a spawnable frigate ability. Anything can shoot them, so their FAR more vulnerable, and make them cost resources, like Mines. Spawning fighters as frigates, meaning coding them as frigates w/ fighter movement is the entire basis of Space Superiority for what I want to do with it.

the PMs carry the Disruption equipment. At 1st, they simply increase phase drive charge-up rates by 400-500% (4-5x), while they can be researched to have Phase Jump Embargoes, where nothing in range can Phase Jump.

Their standard attack I haven't thought about, but they are designed to support, so their best use would be having them hang around the edge of a gravity well.

And not quite Homing Mines/Cap Ships/Missile or Siege Platforms. It would be more like this=

1. Build Carrier/Deploy Carrier to Gravity Well

2. Use 'Deploy Phase Manipulator Squadron' ability. This deploys two Phase Manipulators for a certain cost (uncertain as to how much resources it will cost at present)

3. the Phase Manipulators will then disrupt enemy shielding and phase drives. For greatest effectiveness, they would be best employed around the edge of the GW set at hold position. They also carry shield-weakening equipment (like the Stilakas), so this is also ideal for holding position at the GW's edge. Anything trying to escape will get SLAUGHTERED.

What? As though the SC are specifically targetting the ships exhaust ports? i had a feeling thats what you meant, and the idea there is that exhaust ports are typically not well shielded against attack. there are other targets like that: Weapon Mounts, the Bridge, Shield Emmitters, Hangar Bays, Intake Manifolds etc. its not limited to just Exhaust Ports, which is what i was going for with the name... How about Selective Targetting? its not perfectm but...

You probably mean the B-17 Flying Fortress or B-29 Superfortress, which were actually used in WW2 not 1 (though that was probably a typo). Anyway, I have some info about Combat Aircraft Classes i found during some research, but ill post it in another reply to keep it clean.

i realise. im actually worried about that, having so many weapons systems, fighters, and abilities... we may have overloaded the SotL... i had read somewhere though that some of the 'Nulls' needed for engine graphics, weapon ports, abilities etc, are taken up with simple cabin lights you see on the outside of the ship, as well as other little things that we can do without, basically meaning we can save some nulls if we are careful.

fair enough, i did read your idea of Gunships... i guess it will be fine. considering the number of other SC we are introducing, a Hangar Defense version of Defender Gunship Bombers would be just as good. as for the nerfs, i was just throwing stuff in, if it cant take up two slots, then just reduce the number of craft within a squadron, but yeah, it doent matter now.

Now, as for which structures/caps get what SC, how many squadrons are we talking? are we boosting the numbers of squadrons per ship by alot, a little, or not at all? For instance, considering a TEC SB has only 14 squadrons when fully upgraded, you can have at least 3 of each type of SC, plus two more of your choice... at the very least id like to be able to have maybe 4 squadrons of each type. Same goes for other Caps, considering even the Sova on has 7 or 9 when fully levelled, you can have maybe 1-2 of each plus one more of your choice...

on that point, is it possible, through research to increase the max number of squadrons on a ship? i know you increase hangar capacity of a Starbase by 'purchasing upgrades' for it, so perhaps we could do something similar for Caps?

And on that note =P i think we should make a new line of research... for instance, Defense has its own tab on the research menu, so perhaps a Fleet Resources or Advanced Fleet Technology Research tab, just to put all the new upgrades/researchables we are proposing.

also, Fighters should take out Gunships, Torpedo Bombers, Frigates and other Fighters. just mentioning it because its not clear.

Hangar Defenses need to carry the Specialty Bomber OR the Gunship, or both but make you choose (if its possible). Basically, it needs to be able to take on as many targets as possible, it is pretty much your most viable defense other than SBs...

Carrier Cruisers need to be boosted to carry 3 squadrons to compensate for the new SC types.

Battleships need Fighters and Gunships, the Battleships themselves have the firepower to take out the caps. Destroyers dont need SC. Maybe an Anti-SC ability... or even Flak Frig guns... but not SC. They are heavy hitters enough as they are. or if not, they need to be buffed so as they are.

Carrier is good.

Support is good.

Planet Bomber... you mean dreadnought right? like the Marza? in any case, thats good.

Lancer is good.

TT is good, and just for reference, Gunships/Interceptors/Fighters are all effective vs BPSC and RSC right?

SotL is very good. change the MPF to (Space?) Superiority Fighter or Hero Fighter Squadron, the MTB to Strategic Heavy Bomber or Super Torpedo Bomber, change the Duelist to Elite Interceptor, and the Specialty... well, if its been upgraded... maybe Heavy or Elite <insert specialty name here>. For instance, Elite EWS Bombers.

Now, on a seperate note, with all the new super-charged SC we are implementing, i think we either need to give Flak Frigs a serious buff, maybe even a passive AoE vs SC, and decrease their fleet supply reqs. I still maintain that i think all caps need a passive AoE Anti-SC weapon system like i described back at the beginning of the thread, but if its not possible then its just not possible...

still... aside from the fact that Interceptors and Fighters should be able to take care of each other and bombers... if you dont have the right mix, you could get seriously owned by a swarm of SC... all im saying is it needs to be balanced by something... even if it means bringing out a StrikeCraft Combat Cruiser to at least reduce the effectiveness of SC somehow...

Anyway, ill write another post about Combat Aircraft Classifications, we may need to change some names

I'll respond to your sedond post first...

I want interceptors to be able to take down any other SC.  Just their name makes it sound like they should.  I was wanting the fighters to be multi-purpose that can take down anything with medium or lighter armor.  The MPF ought to be changed to Space Superiority Fighter though.  I want it to almost be like the F-something Mobius from Ace Combat V.  That is the feel I'm going for.  Gunships are mini-battleships.  They have guns everywhere and also, something to note, they have medium armor, giving them some protection against ISC.

Now for the first post...

I know there are other weak point on them...  I was just saying that because thanks to SW ep. IV, everybody knows about the exhaust port.  It was just an example.  Technically, since these things use plasma (or in the Vasari's case, they would likely use Tensor Fields, but that is beside the point) for their shields, you could easily fly through the holes in it.  The shield has to open a hole for friendly fire to escape.  If you can dodge the actual shells, you are in the clear for bombing the heck out of their shield projectors, weapons, Tensor Projectors (things that allow you to use a warp/hyperspace/phase drive), comm. arrays, and more.  Pluse since you would be so low to the ship, that the weapons couldn't fire on you because the ship would be hard-wired to not shoot at itself (unless you are talking about my book, at which point, some ships don't because of this very trick.)  I know there are other weak points, its just that I was going for an omni-compassing term to describe weak points on a capital ship.

Yeah, it was a typo, and that is what I was talking about...

-other stuff-

Yep, I can do both, but you are misunderstanding what it does.  It does not directly kill the enemy SC.  Almost any volley of fire can take out an SC (minus a gunship of course).  What happens is if they don't get killed, they go back to their hangar for jumping.  If they die, they make a cloud of death.  So, whether they live or die, they do damage to something.

-other stuff-

Same as normal with some exceptions.  I want the Orky to have some more squadrons so it can defend itself better.  As for the Mk. upgrades for ships, battleships will receive a slight buff in the way of SC whereas carriers will receive:

TEC: +1 squad, N/A, +1s, N/A, +1s

Vasari: N/A, +1s, N/A, +1s, N/A

Advent: +1 SC/squad, N/A, +1SC/s, N/A, +1SC/s

That is in line with balance, and fits each races style.  Oh and when I say, "N/A," I just meant that they are not gettin SC boosts this time, but they are getting armor/damage/other.

If we boost CC's to 3s, then what about the advent?  Either we need to give their CC's a passive to increase their SC/s amounts or something...  It would nerf their combat ability...

-other stuff-

Marza's are planet bombers.  And no, I don't mean dreadnoughts.  Dreadnought is a fancy way of saying "battleship."

-other stuff-

I did read somewhere about an idea for an ability for a flak frigate for some mod...  Although unarmed, the FF did have an "aura" that slowly damaged enemy SC.  Of course it was weak in damage, but could destroy an entire squad more or less simultaneously, making it far harder to replace the SC.  The TEC would likely use radiation, the Vasari would use a Tensor Field (the things that manipulate gravity), and the Advent would use an actual aura.  Here are some examples:

Radiation Emmision [TEC]

Damages all SC around this ship for 3 DPS

Graviton Manipulation [Vasari]

instills a status on enemy SC upon entering the "bubble" that will cause them to take damage immediately and upon the leaving of the bubble (this is gonna yield a lot of headaches, but I have an idea which I will explain in another post (aka, when I have time because I need to wrap this up)...

Hostile Aura [Advent]

Damages all SC around this ship in a VERY large radius for 1 DPS

And please remind me to explain the Vasari thing...  I know its confusing, but I think I know what to do with it...