Gamers Bill Of Rights
Home | News | Case Studies | Forum
Search
Forum Home | Login

NEW Patch Stat Changes Forums [NEW TOPIC: CAPITAL SHIPS!! 1/2/10]

37 PagesFirst 20 21 22 23 24  Last
Deceiver_0
Agent of Kharma
Join Date 02/2008
+31
Reply #526 January 10, 2010 6:09:29 AM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

I thought about this last night and today.  Like MindsEye says, why make it complicated?

What about a plain, simple DAMAGE CAP (dps) for capital ships?  This will have the same effect as my previous system or other systems proposed.  Anything under the capped dps to capships get's through unmitigated.  Anything over gets pinched.  There could be some exceptions made, like TEC boombases, vasari superweapons, missle barrage, mines, maybe celeio designate target or whatever.

The good things about this idea are: 1) It is SIMPLE and easily implemented by the devs.  If we ignore exceptions like TEC boombases, I could show you a single line of code that should do it, more or less.  2) Say the balance changes in the future due to a patch (has that ever happened before?).  And let's say bomber spam or heavy cruiser spam rules.  No need for another solution - caps are still protected.  And if some magic balance is ever reached, and everyone builds nothing but balanced fleets, then this simple change will have no effect whatsoever.  A win all the way around.

There is no worry about early cap rushes bombing your homeworld - whatever early fleet you have will deal the same dps as now.  Just figure out how many illums you think is reasonable to kill a capship in a reasonable amount of time (20?), figure out that dps, and cap it at that.

// Sample line of code, (C style), ignoring any exceptions to dps like boombases, etc:

if (target_dps > MAX_DPS) target_dps = MAX_DPS ;

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Arthanis
Join Date 09/2009
+3
Reply #527 January 10, 2010 7:11:15 AM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

I hate all ideas of damage caps. It is both unrealistic and against balance at all. Fix broken interactions between unit clases instead of creating artificial solutions like this.

 

 

Just buff caps. There are many ways of doing it:

- buffing damage

- buffing hp/shields

- increasing number of SC

- buffing abilities

- buffing attack behaviour (number of targets per bank, attack fange etc.)

- changeing armor values vs some weapon types

- changeing attack valuses vs some armor types

- reducing cost

- reducing supply requirements

- changeing mitigation values

 

I see no single reason of adding something like "damage cap"

 

 

IMO best way of fixing caps is:

1. Buff UP abilities to level making them viable choice (GRG for example)

2. Increase max number of strikecrafts to 3 on Battleships/Planet killers and to 5 on support caps

3. Buff all UP caps HP/SH/DPS to level making them viable choice

 

I know it is easy to tell but more difficult to do, but IMO we should not try to create new stuff causing new possible imbalances (like "damage cap").

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Hrabandur
Join Date 03/2009
0
Reply #528 January 10, 2010 7:22:10 AM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Buff Replicate Forces?

  Yay, number should depend on what unit is selected + I am not sure but if SC is not copied when targeting a carrier please do so

Allow Dunov shield restore to be self targetable?

  Nay  

Allow Antoraks subversion to effect SC?

   Yay

 Buff Phase out hull?

  Yay maybe give it an Am-draining effect

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
MindsEye
Join Date 05/2008
+7
Reply #529 January 10, 2010 11:09:49 AM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

 

I discussed this issue with agent.We were talking about 80 ilums.Basically I agree with you deciever.I dont think any new tecs or systems will ever make into the game and this is the only way I can think of to reduce massive ff on caps that the devs might use.I am not in favor of reducing damage modifier to caps from lrf.Basically I think a good number is an additional 1-1.5% per cap level.Just to throw out the numbers without sidebeams I can use javs 11 dps.6% of that is .66. So each jav will do .66 less dps.Not alot but if you add it up between 40-50 ships it becomes significant.

I think where the ds team got into trouble was that the more miti a ship has the more your support abilities negate.The lower amount of dps each ship does the more ships get negated by support and repair.Thats why I think its so careful not to go to high.

 

Well for 1 thats alot of ships compared to 1 ship.Alot of fire to absorb.I dont want to see caps become unstoppable but they need better survivability I agree on that.One thing I would like to see is a good counter to lrf like fighters.This would cut down on the issue.One thing is you can do alot in the way of survivability for caps.You have hoshis and dunov for tec.If dunov gets buffed you will be seeing it more often.750 shield restore is pretty good.Advent have progen which is up to 62.5 dps plus guards is another 33%.Vas have overseers and skirantra.Support abilities can prob completely negate around 15-20 ilums.If you make caps to tough how would you ever kill a level 6 marza?I am in support of a miti buff as they level up to a total of 10.That would put a level 6 with 6% more miti then it has now.It doesnt sound like much but the more ships the more damage/ships can be negated by support abilities.An ilum does about 17 damage.6% of 17 is about 1.Each ilum would do 1dps less.So for 80 ilums thats -80 dps.This is if all ilums are using all sidebeams on the cap which is not likely but you get the idea.

Like I was sayin tho fighters need to be able to deal with lrf.This would heavily cut down on lrf in a game.It has been proven to keep lrf at low numbers.

 

Finally we have alot of buffs to caps already on the thread.If the devs listen almost all caps will have significant impacts to the game with respects their abilities.We dont want them to be to hard to kill or they will make frigs useless.

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
MindsEye
Join Date 05/2008
+7
Reply #530 January 10, 2010 11:12:03 AM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

One other Idea for survivability is to buff their speed and maneuverability.Then they could retreat and turn faster.

I didnt realize the celio lasted for so long.One of the probs with it is they only cast on targets that have shield damage?Ships get ff in this game so the 10% damage buff doesnt help you much.Maybe reduce its total time from 60 sec to 30 and up shield to 10.I dont think 10 is enuf to negate 2 ilums ff.

Deciever one other idea as regards carrier caps.I liked darvins idea about reducing thier bombing damage.They remain powerful but a little less useful for rushing.I think its a good idea and will separate all the caps unique qualities even more.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Deceiver_0
Join Date 12/2008
+42
Reply #531 January 10, 2010 12:17:58 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Ok here would be Cap ship Mitigation stats if the increase was 1.8% per level and cap was 80%:

Lvl1: 63(.8)%

Lvl2: 65%

Lvl3: 67%              

Lvl4: 69%

Lvl5: 71%

Lvl6: 72%

Lvl7: 74%

Lvl8: 76% 

Lvl9: 78%

Lvl10:80%

With these stats, Cap ships could reach the current max lvl10 mitigation by lvl6. With javs DPS as an example, at lvl 6 javs with 11 dps would do only 3 dps, multiplied by 80 javs is only 240 dps. At lvl10 its gets reduced further to 176 dps.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Arthanis
Join Date 09/2009
+3
Reply #532 January 10, 2010 12:25:13 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

How specialized different caps are?

 

IMO not much.

In "specialized" world:

- Battleship should be only one ship able to deal and take huge damage (while differences betwen different classes are not drastic)

- Carrier should be only one with real SC potential (it is mostly truth... bot only this one point)

- Colonizers should be completely focused on colonization (again - not truth. Some of their combat abilities are more powerful then combat classes have)

- Planet Killers should be only one class able to deal real damage vs planet and should be relatively weak in everything else (not truth: on the one hand caps bombard abilities are very similar, on the second hand lvl 6 marza is worth more then battleship...)

- Support class should be support kings (agaons- not truth. They have same number of abilities as other classes, but have also relatively low health, low DPS, small SC armament... nothing special at all)

 

 

So instead of trying to make caps speciallized (which require entire caps rebalancing, because nothing work way it should work...), underused caps should bve buffed in general.

 

ATM two caps classes which don't need huge rebvalancing (just because they are far more useful then other classes...) are Colonizers and Carriers.

 

Rest of capships should get multiple slight buffs in many aspects (IMO better option then huge buff to one-two things. Caps are not specialized, and trying to make them specialized will cause many possible imbalances):

- slight SC number increase (3 on BS/PK, 5 on support)

- slight hp/sh increase (10-20% - depending how up selected cap is)

- slight dps increase (see above)

- buffs/AM cost reduction to underused abilities making them viable choice (RGR, Animose etc)

 

 

Finally, some op stuff like Marza rocket barrage need some reworking, since entire game should not be balanced around one OP ability (It is my reply to people who say "don't make caps too strong because lvl 6 marza will be invincible")

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Deceiver_0
Join Date 12/2008
+42
Reply #533 January 10, 2010 12:30:06 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Marza MB is no longer an OP ability, Advent can negate most of the damage with a progen shield restore, can stop it with reverie or detonate AM. Vasari bombers can bypass shields and mitigation, can survive it with repair clouds, or shut it down with Phase out hull and possibly disruptive strikes.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Arthanis
Join Date 09/2009
+3
Reply #534 January 10, 2010 12:43:13 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Marza MB is no longer an OP ability, Advent can negate most of the damage with a progen shield restore, can stop it with reverie or detonate AM. Vasari bombers can bypass shields and mitigation, can survive it with repair clouds, or shut it down with Phase out hull and possibly disruptive strikes.

 

It was just counter-argument to people who don't want to buff caps because of "invincible lvl6 marza", you don't need to convince me. My point is "thing A should not prevent making things B, C, D, and E balances just because their buff will make thing A - if so, thing A need reworking, not things B-E are supossed to stay weak". There is nothing to discuss about "thing A".

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
MindsEye
Join Date 05/2008
+7
Reply #535 January 10, 2010 1:23:04 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
MindsEye
Join Date 05/2008
+7
Reply #536 January 10, 2010 1:28:34 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

What are the current stats?I thought caps start at 65% and go up 1% per level.

As of 1.03 kortul

maxMitigation
 StartValue 0.650000
 ValueIncreasePerLevel 0.011110

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Agent of Kharma
Join Date 02/2008
+31
Reply #537 January 10, 2010 2:03:04 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Ok here would be Cap ship Mitigation stats if the increase was 1.8% per level and cap was 80%:

Not a bad idea, per se (bumping mitigation as a cap levels).  I'd certainly support it over doing nothing.  But can we do better?

As I and Darvin have said, the problem seems to be that the role of caps does not scale with fleet size.  The above makes mitigation scale with cap level.  But how about, quite literally, making it scale with fleet size!

Option 1:   Additional mitigation added to ALL caps in the game according to the maximum researched fleet level in the game.
Option 1A: Additional mitigation added to YOUR caps according to YOUR maximum researched fleet level.

Option 2:   Additional mitigation added to ALL caps in the game according to the maximum researched cap crew level in the game.
Option 2A: Additional mitigation added to YOUR caps according to YOUR maximum researched crew level.

I like option 1 the best, because it most directly maps the problem (cap role not scaling with fleet size) with the solution (scaling added mitigation to fleet size).

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Twilight_Storm
Join Date 07/2009
+92
Reply #538 January 10, 2010 2:09:41 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Though it is less realistic than mitigation with levels.  I say, Deciever's plan is best.  It caps out at 80%, and brings advent to 84.  If it eren't for their mitigation research, i'd say go 85% across the board, but since they do, this is the best plan.  Scaling to fleet size is like saying "I have more ships, so they are stronger"  No.  Having more ships means you can take a heavier beating, but not on a ship to ship basis.

Although, another way to go would be a 4-6 tier mitigation research on Cap Ships only, like, 5% per level, 3 levels total available.

Now that  write it, Deciever still seems to have the better idea, but maybe someone can work with this...or it's already been said and i missed it...

-Exile(\/)

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Arthanis
Join Date 09/2009
+3
Reply #539 January 10, 2010 2:59:28 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Caps are not UP is large-scale battles only... But I like this (max mitigation increase) buff anyway.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Agent of Kharma
Join Date 02/2008
+31
Reply #540 January 10, 2010 5:06:08 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Though it is less realistic than mitigation with levels.

Not sure that I agree, but screw "realism," I care more about solving the problem.

The problem is cap survivability scaling to fleet size.  My solution is cap survivability (mitigation) scaling to fleet size.  Problem solved.

Scaling to fleet size is like saying "I have more ships, so they are stronger"

Scaling to fleet size is like saying "there is a problem with cap survivability scaling to fleet size, so I will solve it by making cap survivability scale to fleet size."

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Deceiver_0
Join Date 12/2008
+42
Reply #541 January 10, 2010 6:59:30 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Minds-

I tested them directly (built a cap and sent in to enemy territory alone to be pummeled by enemy ships and defenses) , and at lvl 1 most (didnt test all) start with 62% max mitigation. I assumed most caps were the same in that regard but I may be wrong based on your 1.03 Kortul stats. Perhaps I should just put up a topic for vote on increase on max shield mitigation gain per level, and let the Devs figure out the specifics, they can test adjustments more thoroughly than most of us can anyway.

I'm pretty convinced that increasing max mitigation gain per level and fixing illum bug will cut down on huge LRF fleets bulldozing caps. As I've said before, the games balance is closer to perfect than ever, so lots of small adjustments are going to be the best way to get it closer, as opposed to 1 large adjustment that could have unforeseen consequences. Also, adjusting code thats already in place is much easier than creating new code.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Tohron
Join Date 11/2008
+8
Reply #542 January 10, 2010 7:19:29 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Just an interesting thought about capital ships - since the Vasari frigates are definitively inferior to their TEC and Advent counterparts (at least until Optimized Construction and RA come into play in the late game), and Vasari capital ships are clearly very important (just look at the crew sizes for Vasari caps vs. crew sizes for Advent & TEC caps), wouldn't it be a good balancing measure to give a HP/Shields increase exclusively to Vasari capital ships, to counterbalance their weaker frigates?

This would give them a ready counter to a scout/lf rush that doesn't involve an Orkulus, since their buffed caps could hold out for a long time against these ship types.  By giving them caps, the Vasari be rendered even more unique without becoming imbalanced, since their frigates would remain inferior to other races.  And in the late game, bomber spam would make those extra defenses worth very little - either you kill the bombers or lose the cap.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
DesConnor
Join Date 09/2008
+12
Reply #543 January 10, 2010 7:39:14 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

How about an accuracy penalty when too many ships fire on the same target?  Accuracy penalties already exist in the code, and accuracy is currently underused- this method would help the Akkan and Radiance.  I'm also concerned that a mitigation increase would be a further buff for Advent.  Advent already suffer least from the vulnerability of capital ships.

I can't agree that the game's balance is closer to perfect than ever.  It's isn't even as balanced as before the balance patch.  The worst problem before the patch was Illuminator spam and the Illuminators were heavily buffed, perhaps due to a bug but it is one that hasn't been fixed.  When the top players will no longer feel forced to choose Advent to play each other 1v1, then the game might approach balance.  What is apparent is that TEC players have so little confidence in the alleged power of the Level 6 Marza that most of them have jumped at the opportunity to field a Sova, allowing them some game on the defensive.  It is all Advent, the only respite in team games is that they counter each other somewhat.  Or find me a replay between equally skilled players that shows otherwise?     

I suspect that the new expansion is meant to affect gameplay balance, though it is difficult to see how it can boost the factions that need early help in the 1v1 game.  Until we organise proper 1v1 testing, like any other decent RTS, this is all just conjecture.  We need to have good players who will play 1v1, Advent vs Vasari, Vasari vs TEC, TEC vs Advent, and then take the other side, and then put up the replays.  We need a standard map.  These are very basic practices for RTS testing. 

When there are hotfixes being put out for beta issues fairly regularly, why can't we have a hotfix for the Illuminators?  Why can't the beta hotfixes include simple fixes for the basic game?  I'm losing confidence that there will ever be the sort of balancing that the game desperately needs.  Why test a deliberately bugged game?

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Deceiver_0
Join Date 12/2008
+42
Reply #544 January 10, 2010 8:26:02 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Desconnor-

Mitigation additions assists Vasari the most, as theyre the only race that can bypass mitigation entirely. Accuracy code does already exist, but again, it would have to be somehow coded in to ship targeting etc etc. Mitigation gains are ALREADY coded into cap ships, one simply has to adjust the gains. I do believe with all the changes made in the previous patch brought the game much closer to balance because, evethough there is STILL an illuminator problem, there is now more usage of other ships like LFS, CArrier caps, and less usage of repulse. Also one should note that many of the changes called for above are somewhat trivial, while the changes on the last PSCF were all much less so. That to me says improvement. Advent are still out of line, but thats mainly due to 1 problem, as oppsed to a host of problems from the previous patch.

Also, the expansion is aimed at creating diplomatic relations, not balance. I suspect they have a deadline to meet that is fast approaching which is why all hands are on deck to get that rolled out. Ironclad isnt a huge company with hundreds of employees working on lots of different projects. Theyre relatively small, and certainly are focused on getting Diplomacy debugged and the additions balanced. Im confident that despite this, they'll still patch the game (theyve done so many times already havent they?), so we should certainly give our input on what needs adjustment to help.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Agent of Kharma
Join Date 02/2008
+31
Reply #545 January 10, 2010 8:30:14 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Hi DesConnor, I think the reason pros aren't lining up to do your suggested testing 1v1 is that everybody and their mother already knows Advent is OP.  I mean, usually when you see people calling for nerfs of something, like marza MB, you'll have a bunch of defenders lining up on the other side of the issue, saying no nerf is needed, blah blah.  But just look at the absence of people lining up to defend the Advent.  The silence on the other side is deafening!

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Volt_Cruelerz
Join Date 06/2008
+115
Reply #546 January 10, 2010 8:42:28 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

@Deceiver: Maybe..  I'm not totally against that, but I'm certainly not for it either.  Honestly, I don't see any good option, just a bunch of things that would end catastrophically and a few that might work.  Here are those that might:

Mitigation Increase:

Pros: Decreases the damage dealt to capital ships very effectively.

Cons: Could cause Advent capitals to become nearly invincible and raise effectiveness of capital rushing.  (And albeit a somewhat selfish reason, would ruin one of abilities in my mod.)

Health Increase Per Level:

Pros: Increases survivability to capitals.

Cons: Risks making level 10 capitals invincible or leaving low level ones out to dry.

Researchables:

Pros: Would effectively increase survivability and could possibly buff other things such as damage.  Would also prevent newer capitals from getting destroyed due to its base on technological level rather than ship level.

Cons: Costs money.  This would discourage people from buying it unless they had spare cash.  Unless of course you had them really cheap, but then quick-teching might increase the power of capital rushes.

 

I don't know which one to go with.  There are the pros and cons of each.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
DesConnor
Join Date 09/2008
+12
Reply #547 January 10, 2010 8:55:57 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

So if there was a problem with late game hordes of Vasari LRF demolishing capitals, the mitigation-based solution wouldn't affect it, if mitigation bypass was a reliable method to kill capitals?  Higher mitigation for capitals will just make Advent colony caps invincible early, and hence Guardians more effective again.  Also, should there somehow be a balanced version of the early game, a mitigation solution would then imbalance it in favour of the late game Vasari, whose weakness is not the problem..?

I'm confident that the game will be patched again, but Advent have been too strong for a long time, and the absence of an Illuminator bugfix doesn't encourage me to believe that they will be fixed.  It's a simple fix as well.  Even if there's some desire not to disturb the current multiplayer game- why, so it can be crap?- that shouldn't apply to the beta, why isn't the fix, or any attempt at it, there?

I'm in the same awkward position as you Agent, my play isn't consistently strong enough to be any help convincing anyone.  We need some of the top players, and especially the innovators.  I'd like to see a replay of Pawelo's Vasari 1v1 against a 'Tier player' as Advent.  The game has to be balanced for 1v1... that is balance.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
MindsEye
Join Date 05/2008
+7
Reply #548 January 10, 2010 9:26:22 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Minds-

I tested them directly (built a cap and sent in to enemy territory alone to be pummeled by enemy ships and defenses) , and at lvl 1 most (didnt test all) start with 62% max mitigation. I assumed most caps were the same in that regard but I may be wrong based on your 1.03 Kortul stats. Perhaps I should just put up a topic for vote on increase on max shield mitigation gain per level, and let the Devs figure out the specifics, they can test adjustments more thoroughly than most of us can anyway.

I'm pretty convinced that increasing max mitigation gain per level and fixing illum bug will cut down on huge LRF fleets bulldozing caps. As I've said before, the games balance is closer to perfect than ever, so lots of small adjustments are going to be the best way to get it closer, as opposed to 1 large adjustment that could have unforeseen consequences. Also, adjusting code thats already in place is much easier than creating new code.

I like your suggestion and I agree with it.Its weird 1.03 files says caps start with 65 but really start with 62?I didnt know they changed it.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
MindsEye
Join Date 05/2008
+7
Reply #549 January 10, 2010 9:27:31 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

So waht you guys think of my suggestion for ther celio.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Deceiver_0
Twilight_Storm
Join Date 07/2009
+92
Reply #550 January 10, 2010 9:34:20 PM
from Sins of a Solar Empire ForumsSins of a Solar Empire Forums

Don't fix what ain't broke.

-Exile(\/)

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
37 PagesFirst 20 21 22 23 24  Last
View all recent posts
Mark all posts as read Delete cookies created by the forum Return to Top
Stardock Forums v        Server Load Time:   Page Render Time:
© 2025 Stardock. All rights reserved.
Home News Case Studies Forums