Hey everyone its that time again, lets compile some data!
This is a post that I will update regularly to give the DEVS a better idea of what people think should be done to stats in the next patch. This is ONLY for patches, no new ships or elaborate concepts for the next expansion. This is for dealing with peoples’ concerns about balance. If there’s a balance idea you have that’s not on here, post it and I’ll put it up for voting if it seems valid. I love the fact that ICO pays attention to the forums and what people suggest, I’d like to make it easier for them. The idea is to have all ideas posted straight forward and ranked so the DEVS don’t have to sift through pages and pages to find popular ideas. SP and MP players are both welcome to comment. Post yay or nay for any idea you like or dislike (be specific please) or say no fix needed. If you’d like I’ll also insert specific values you may come up with. Some votes will be taken from other threads.
BUGS
Since the last patches release, the main complaint I've seen on the forums are in the form of bugs, so I'm compiling a list of the known ones, and will update the list as more are discovered. Some of the early bugs were fixed in the hotfix, and perhaps (fingers crossed) the Devs will release another hotfix to address the rest, rather than a whole new patch. So here it goes:
- Nano Weapons Jammer autocast AI casts continuously
- AM Recharger autocast AI casts continuously
- Illuminator causes mystery damage between shots
- Phasic Trap research Level 2 still has no effect.
- Orkulus Phase Stabilizer does not work on stars.
- Random Map Bugs:
- Single Phase lane starts
- No connected Asteroids
- Overlapping Gravity Wells
- Backwards Dunov Icon
- Pathing Improvements (specifically dealing with stationary obstacles)
- Orkulus commands cancelled when trade ships dock
- No wave cannon sounds on Kortul
- Resource extractors on HWs produce income before they're constructed.
- PAWELOS BUG HUNTING
- Siege Militia/pirates run from turrets before construction is complete (exploit).
CAPITAL SHIPS
This will be a large section that will continue to evolve through out the life of this thread so check back often for new topics. Consensus seems to think now that carrier caps have all been buffed, many of the other caps need to be brought up to par with them.
Buff Battleship Class(Kol/Radiance/Kortul)
Increase hp/shields/armor?-
Yay- Volt_Cruelerz(20-25%) Darvin3 Deceiver_0 CallenExile MindsEye Swordsalmon Hrabandur CrazyElectron Ryat Arthanis Warlord Mike Onigiri
Nay-
Increase DPS?-
Yay- Volt_Cruelerz(20-25%) Darvin3 Deceiver_0 MindsEye Swordsalmon CallenExile Hrabandur CrazyElectron Ryat Arthanis Warlord Mike
Nay- Onigiri
Buff Gauss Rail Gun?-
Yay- Volt_Cruelerz(800/1200/1600) Darvin3 Deceiver_0 CallenExile MindsEye Swordsalmon CrazyElectron Ryat Arthanis Warlord Mike
Nay- Hrabandur Onigiri
Re-work Animosity?
Yay- Volt_Cruelerz Darvin3 Deceiver_0 MindsEye Swordsalmon Ryat Arthanis Warlord Mike
Nay- CallenExile Hrabandur Onigiri
No Change needed- CoBBQ
Colonizer Caps(Akkan/Progenitor/Jarrasul)
Buff Jarrasul Evacuator's colonize?
Yay- Darvin3 Volt_Cruelerz Deceiver_0 Swordsalmon Agent of Kharma Hrabandur Ryat Arthanis Warlord Mike Onigiri
Nay- CallenExile MindsEye
No Change needed-
Carrier Class Caps(Sova/Halcyon/Skirantra)
Buff Scramble Bombers?
Yay- Darvin3 Volt_Cruelerz Deceiver_0 MindsEye Swordsalmon Agent of Kharma Hrabandur Ryat Arthanis Warlord Mike
Nay- CallenExile Onigiri
Buff Replicate Forces?
Yay- Arthanis Warlord Mike Onigiri
Buff Support Class Caps(Dunov/Antorak/Rapture/Revelation)
Increase AM regen?
Yay- Darvin3 Hrabandur CrazyElectron Ryat Juletron Arthanis Warlord Mike Swordsalmon
Nay- CallenExile Mindseye Onigiri
Increase maximum AM?
Yay- CallenExile Darvin3 Hrabandur Mindseye Volt_Cruelerz CrazyElectron Juletron Arthanis Warlord Mike
Nay- Ryat Swordsalmon Onigiri
Increase Dunov EMP range?
Yay- CallenExile Mindseye Volt_Cruelerz CrazyElectron Ryat Juletron Arthanis Warlord Mike Swordsalmon
Allow Dunov shield restore to be self targetable?
Yay- Mindseye CrazyElectron Juletron Arthanis Deceiver_0
Nay- Ryat Volt_Cruelerz Warlord Mike Swordsalmon Onigiri
Allow Antoraks subversion to effect SC?
Yay- Mindseye Juletron Volt_Cruelerz Arthanis Warlord Mike Onigiri
Nay- Ryat Swordsalmon
Buff Phase out hull?
Yay- Mindseye Juletron Volt_Cruelerz Arthanis Warlord Mike Swordsalmon
Nay- Ryat Onigiri
No Change Needed-
DELIVERANCE ENGINE
Without a doubt the weakest of the superweapons, there is little point in seeking it. For too long its been sitting in a dusty box on the shelf, to weak to be worth its tremendous costs. Lets consider some buffs to at least make it functional as a weapon. The one buff thats been suggested that I like is an instant allegiance drop, which will aid Advent in cultural takeovers of border planets and with enough, could possibly overthrow an enemy planet (though Id say it should require many more than the fearsome novalith)
Buff Deliverance engine-
Cause an instant decrease in allegiance?
Yay- Deceiver_0 Kitkun Greyfox2 anteachtaire Mow Mow Warlord Mike Hrabandur Arthanis
Nay- Howdidudothat
No buff needed- Qu4r Darvin3 CallenExile
EMPIRE TREE
As I feel that the devs decision to put "Phase Jumping" ships at the top of the tree was purposeful and not a bug, I think most of us agree that the constant movement it creates (especially with phase monitoring!) makes the empire tree difficult to use. Move it to the bottom?
Adjust Empire Tree-
Move "Phase Jumping Ships" to the bottom of the tree?
Yay- Deceiver_0 Darvin3 SwordSalmon JSW_Ballz Mindseye Agent of Kharma Ryat 52500 Mow Mow Fuzzy Logic EadTaes Warlord Mike Hrabandur Howdidudothat -Ue_Carbon Chaotic Magician Arthanis
Nay- CallenExile
FIGHTERS
Some are unsatisfied with fighters with regards to surviving flak. I urge everyone to read the points of debate between Mindseye and myself starting on page 10-11, to get a better understanding of why fighters should or should not be adjusted. Below are a few suggestions
Buff Fighters-
Increase armor/hp?
Yay- Mindseye Mow Mow Greyfox2 Qu4r Arthanis
Nay- Deceiver_0 Darvin3 Ryat Top Vasari Warlord Mike EadTaes Hrabandur Howdidudothat -Ue_Carbon Chaotic Magician Agent of Kharma CallenExile CrazyElectron
MAPS
Raging Amish has proposed some modest changes to maps that I think we could possibly have implemented with enough support, so lets get a vote to see what people think of them. Magnetic clouds are huge wastes of space as their is nothing terribly beneficial about them. People with ability heavy fleets and caps would opt to fight you somewhere else (and can do so without much penalty). They make awful chokepoints because you can't put starbases or mines there, and they offer no economic value. I'd like to hear some ideas on how to improve them (beyond removing them completely from the game as RA has suggested). If we can come up with some good ones I'll put them up for a vote. In the meantime, I think one should at least be able to construct Starbases here, so I'll put that up as a topic. Also, all too often we see Ice and Volcanic planets (which require research to colonize) offering you only 2 resource mines for the trouble of colonizing them. Personally I don't think that PLANETS should have less resources to offer than an asteroid. What do you think?
Magnetic Clouds-
Allow starbase deployment?
Yay- Deceiver_0 Darvin3 Hrabandur Juletron Howdidudothat Warlord Mike DirtySanchezz Kitkun Qu4r CrazyElectron
Nay- Ryat CallenExile EadTaes DesConnor -Ue_Carbon Chaotic Magician
Ice/Volcanic planets-
Change minimum mines to 3 (currently 2)?
Yay- Deceiver_0 Swordsalmon Ryat Darvin3 Juletron Mindseye Mow Mow EadTaes JSW_Ballz Howdidudothat Warlord Mike Kitkun Ovi_187 -Ue_Carbon Chaotic Magician CrazyElectron
Nay- CallenExile DesConnor DirtySanchezz Hrabandur Agent of Kharma Qu4r
No Changes needed-
ORKULUS STARBASE
This topic is going to be heavy on the debate, and will likely be updated several times with NEW votable options throughout the life of this thread. Now, I think it's safe to say that we're beyond the point of the DEVS making a Vasari Assault cruiser and making the Orky stationary. So if thats what you think should happen thats fine, but it would be more useful for everyone if you hada second opinion on the Orky and voted on the issues below.
Nerf Orkulus-
Increase build penalty in hostile wells? (currently 2.25x unupgraded)
Yay- Greyfox2 Raging Amish(3x) Mindseye Arthanis
Nay- Deceiver_0 Cykur Howdidudothat Top Vasari Swordsalmon Ryat anteachtaire LordMechanoid JSW_Ballz Warlord Mike Agent of Kharma DesConnor DirtySanchezz Kitkun Qu4r 52500 Hrabandur -Ue_Carbon Chaotic Magician Qu4r CallenExile
Other-
SB constructors trigger phase monitoring alarm? ("Hostile forces are inbound")
Yay- Mindseye Deceiver_0 Howdidudothat Top Vasari Cykur LordMechanoid Warlord Mike DirtySanchezz Kitkun 52500 Hrabandur -Ue_Carbon Chaotic Magician CallenExile CrazyElectron Arthanis
Nay- JSW_Ballz DesConnor Qu4r
SCOUT FRIGATES
A hotly debated topic right now on the forums, none can deny their increased presence on the MP battlefield. As the cheapest buildable unit in the game, as well as being tier 0, its utility against long ranged frigates has been thoroughly exploited. The question remains, is it balanced? This topic will be split into two sections, a general section for a blanket nerf and a more specific section for interspecies balance. The reason for this is that some think scouts need to be weaker in general, whike other think they need to be balanced on par wtih TEC scouts.
Nerf Scouts-
Decrease hp/shields?
Yay-
Nay- DirtySanchezz Cykur Arthanis
Decrease DPS?
Yay- DirtySanchezz Greyfox2 Mindseye Arthanis
Nay- Cykur
Increase Cost/supply?
Yay- Mindseye Cykur Swordsalmon
Nay- DirtySanchezz Arthanis
No Nerf Needed- Deceiver_0 Wingflier Howdidudothat Darvin3 Ryat CallenExile Chaotic Magician Agent of Kharma Sivcorp 52500 JSW_Ballz LordMechanoid Kitkun Hrabandur -Ue_Carbon Qu4r CrazyElectron
Balance Scouts-
Decrease Seeker Vessels Hp/shields/armor?
Yay- Deceiver_0 Wingflier Mow Mow Swordsalmon Darvin3 Ryat Greyfox2 52500 JSW_Ballz Cykur Top Vasari LordMechanoid Kitkun Hrabandur -Ue_Carbon Qu4r CrazyElectron Arthanis
Nay- DirtySanchezz Howdidudothat CallenExile
Decrease Seeker Vessels DPS?
Yay- Swordsalmon DirtySanchezz Howdidudothat Greyfox2 Hrabandur Qu4r
Nay- Wingflier Darvin3 Ryat CallenExile 52500 JSW_Ballz Cykur LordMechanoid Kitkun -Ue_Carbon CrazyElectron Arthanis
Decrease Jikara Navigator cost/supply?
Yay- Deceiver_0 Wingflier Howdidudothat CallenExile 52500 LordMechanoid Hrabandur Qu4r
Nay- Swordsalmon DirtySanchezz Darvin3 Ryat Chaotic Magician JSW_Ballz Cykur Greyfox2 Kitkun -Ue_Carbon CrazyElectron Arthanis
Increase Jikara Navigator DPS?
Yay- Mow Mow Swordsalmon Howdidudothat Ryat Chaotic Magician 52500 JSW_Ballz Hrabandur -Ue_Carbon Qu4r CrazyElectron Arthanis
Nay- Wingflier DirtySanchezz Darvin3 CallenExile Cykur Greyfox2 LordMechanoid Kitkun
Increase Jikara Navigator hp/shields?
Yay- Mow Mow Darvin3 Ryat Chaotic Magician Sivcorp Top Vasari Kitkun Hrabandur -Ue_Carbon Qu4r CrazyElectron Arthanis
Nay- CallenExile JSW_Ballz Cykur LordMechanoid
No Balance Needed- Agent of Kharma EadTaes DesConnor
RAVASTRA SKIRMISHERS
While the most expensive light frigate in both resources and supply, these ships have the worst DPS per supply. With the recent buff to all light frigs, Cobalts and Disciples are now delivering on the tasks they're meant to, yet skirmishers are still struggling. So what should be done?
Buff Skirmishers-
Increase DPS? Yay- Deceiver_0 Darvin3 52500 Cykur Chaotic Magician Top Vasari Howdidudothat Wingflier Swordsalmon Juletron Ryat Sivcorp DirtySanchezz GreyFox2 Raging Amish CallenExile Mindseye JSW_Ballz Warlord Mike lbgsloan Mow Mow EadTaes DesConnor Kitkun Agent of Kharma Hrabandur -Ue_Carbon Qu4r CrazyElectron Arthanis
Nay- LordMechanoid
Decrease Supply cost?
Yay- Raging Amish LordMechanoid Hrabandur Qu4r
Nay- Deceiver_0 Darvin3 52500 Cykur Chaotic Magician Top Vasari Howdidudothat Wingflier Swordsalmon Juletron Ryat CallenExile Mindseye JSW_Ballz Warlord Mike lbgsloan Mow Mow Kitkun -Ue_Carbon CrazyElectron Arthanis
Decrease Resource cost?
Yay- 52500 Warlord Mike
Nay- Darvin3 Cykur Chaotic Magician Top Vasari Howdidudothat Wingflier Swordsalmon Juletron Ryat DirtySanchezz Raging Amish CallenExile Mindseye JSW_Ballz LordMechanoid lbgsloan Kitkun Hrabandur -Ue_Carbon Qu4r Arthanis
Adjust Reintegration autocast AI to activate earlier?
Yay- Deceiver_0 Darvin3 52500 Chaotic Magician Top Vasari Howdidudothat Wingflier Swordsalmon Juletron Ryat Sivcorp Runesia DirtySanchezz GreyFox2 Raging Amish CallenExile Mindseye JSW_Ballz Warlord Mike lbgsloan Mow Mow EadTaes Kitkun Agent of Kharma Hrabandur -Ue_Carbon Qu4r CrazyElectron Arthanis
I think the armor type on the ogrov/adjudici is fine. It is intuitive and makes sense. All the things that "assault" either my planet (siege frigs) or structures (ogrovs/adjudici) have the same armor type and are countered by fighters. As a defender, I know what to build for the counter. Just seems to make sense. Fighters are for defense, bombers are never for defense but for offense. It is a "wholistic" and consistent system. It isn't arbitrary. I like it.
I do rather like the idea of switching Adjudicator and Ogrov Armor to Heavy - for one thing, it makes sense, seeing how they're CRUISERS, not frigates, so the armor would be justified. Two, who says that a little variety is a bad thing? Just means that "lol I mass fighterz I win" is no longer a suitable tactic. Third...Well, I'd tell you number three, but then I'd have to kill you - it's something of a little insight I made myself.
Anyone remember when lrms were the answer to everything? Well this situation with the siege vessels & fighters is like that, only not as bad.
Let's put it this way:
Unit A
Unit B
Unit 1
Unit 2
Numbers are you, Letters are the opponent.
You are defending your homeworld. Unit A comes en-masse to attack you. You respond with your Unit 1, witch counters Unit A. Enemy fleet commander responds with Unit B, which has High defense against Unit 1. As a response, you send Unit 2 to fight off Unit B, which it counters, but does not counter Unit A.
This crossover system is the same as would naturally evolve in any fleet that has reached critical mass, like all 3 races of sins. You won't send the same ship in a different shape, you'll send a ship that is not weak against what your enemy is using. Granted, they will send something new to counter you, but that is the inevitable evolution of war.
That said, very few units in sins possess the same purpose as the others in their faction, with exceptions made for LF and HC, being slightly different, but having the same basic purpose as the fleet's "Tank" units. The game, IMO, doesn't represent a true war-zone, but that is a very diffiult thing to do, and would require every ship in the fleet to essentially be made up of Capitol ship style units, that you customize yourself. Needless to say, that is not a viable option overall, at least with our current programming capabilities.
-Exile
Exactly.
Seige frigates do not have the same role as bombers so this is an irrelevant comparison.
If the enemy has already massed fighters, you can't use bombers. However, the other option is just as useless in that situation so why have another option (assualt cruisers) at all? It makes no sense and is entirely redundant.
It isn't an irrelevant comparison. The siege frigates assault my planet. Ogrovs and Adjudicators assault my structures. So do bombers. Fighters counter all of them. Simple, intuitive, makes sense. No need for me to have to map an arbitrary, complex system of counters in my head, making things complicated just for the sake of making things complicated.
The problem here isn't the vulnerability to fighters. Make your own fighters, or build flak. The problem is that the Ogrov/Adjudicator only attacks structures, but costs about the same as a damn carrier. So usually you'd just rather build a carrier.
No, no and no. This is not making things complicated for the sake of it. I for one would rather have a complex counter system then a overly simplistic one.
Thats the problem! To defend your structures all you need to do is spam fighters which is boring and stupid. The defender doesn't need to adapt. Its just spam, spam, spam fighters. Seiging planets is very different to destroying structures.
Defender: "I don't know what my opponent is going to use against my structures, but I already know what units to get." See the problem?
My point is that the defender should need to respond to the new threat of assualt cruisers. Responding to the new threat of enemy flak etc. is irrelevant to assualt cruiser balance.
Further more it is counter-intiative to have assualt cruisers the only cruisers to have light armour when the rest have heavy.
No switching from bombers to assault cruisers in the face of fighters does have a purpose.
1) Bombers are somewhat slow at destroying starbases, or you need a TON of them to get the job done with any kind of speed. If you're facing an amount of fighters (and/or flak, and/or anti-sc abilities) that prevents you from destroying a Starbase, increasing the amount of bombers wont get you as far as switching your bombers to fighters and getting assault cruisers, which can get the job done much faster.
2) A big difference is made in where the SC in the well are fighting, while bombers themselves are very short ranged, your fleet cannot support them with your own anti-sc units (with the exception of fighters), where as the range of assault cruisers allows you to support them with your fleet, and forces enemy fighters to engage on your turf. This is THE MAIN DIFFERENCE. THIS is the Alternative. This is the Advantage
If you truly believed in the whole "if unit 1 and unit 2 do the same thing, they should have different counters" BS, then you should think that carriers shouldnt counter all 3 fleet heavy hitters (LRF, HC, Capital Ships). Those three are designed to be the biggest damage dealers in your fleet, yet theyre all countered by the SAME UNIT. So do people spam carriers only? No, because there are units specifically designed to neutralize them.
So then what is the deal? How do you beat fighters normally? Well with flak, fighters, and Anti SC abilities of course! But how do you get them to come out from the safety of the starbase so you can use YOUR flak, and YOUR anti-sc abilities to neutralize them? Well you get assault cruisers! That you can heal! and protect! That are cheaper than more carriers, and actually do the job faster!
Consider the defenders burden in a situation where assault cruisers are countered by Bombers. You can only have so many strikecraft from defensive structures, being forced to divide them in half to go half bombers, half fighters would make them all over useless against fleets with many many more SC than a planets defenses could hope to handle. At least with as many fighters as you can muster you stand a chance with the upgrades your hangars can get, and not having to worry about your fighters getting obliterated by enemy flak, or magnetize or bitch slap etc. Or worse, having to switch from fighters to bombers to handle incoming assault cruisers that could easily destroy every structure before the hangars or Starbase can fill an entire squad of bombers. They'd be completely screwed if that fleet had even a small number of fighters to suppress the bombers.
With fighters countering Assault cruisers, they stand a chance (though in many cases, not a very good one) of being able to take them out before the fighters are suppressed by the enemy fleet. Assault cruisers aren't weak units. They've got respectable amounts of hull and shields and do LOADS of damage to structures.
I get some of the arguements like "the only cruiser with light armor". I get that, but I think certain things above outweigh that. You want to change the armor to heavy? Fighters and Bombers get the same modifier to heavy armor (50%). That doesnt help if you want bombers to be the answer.
Well all I can say to that is, if my subverters have heavy armor, it's some really crappy heavy armor, because they die to one pass of a fighter squadron.
The problem is these anti-structure cruisers cost the same as carriers, but aren't as good as carriers. That's why it isn't an alternative. If you can have a unit that is only effective against structures, or a unit for the same price that is effective against everything, and has longer range to boot, you're right, it's not an alternative. You just pick the carrier.
Lowering the supply on these things might nerf starbases though, which I don't want to happen. One solution might be to make bombers less effective against structures. But what would that do to vasari, since they don't have an anti-structure cruiser, and therefore probably need bombers?
Anyway, I think either bombers should be nerfed vs. structures so as to make the anti-structure cruisers a vaible choice, or their supply needs to be reduced because their supply is just huge.
@Deceiver- my thinking in making Assault Cruiser armor "heavy" is that now instead of be shredded by fighters they are shredded by LF (giving the rather under-valued LF another useful role).
@AoK- Agreed in reference to the Starfish. Ogrovs are already pretty good (costing a little less than a TEC carrier and having about the same supply I believe). Adjudicators are just too expensive and supply intensive to be worthwhile.
If adjudicators could fire multiple shots at one target, that would solve the problem, but currently they don't.
I'm in favor of changing the armor type on the assault cruisers.
Karma, I don't think you're going to win any arguments by saying "I want to be able to spam as the defense"
Also, I understand the argument for making Adjudicators capable of (individual) focus fire, but I still don't like it. Currently, they're fairly distinct from the Orgovs in their method of use, and I like them that way.
ATM it is:
Enemy send Bombers => Build fighters
Enemy send assault cruisers => Build fighters.
So Fighters are omni counter to anti-structure units. It is bad for tactical diversity...
I agree with:
Enemy send assault cruisers => Build bombers
Much better. If enemy has tons of fighters, you can still surprise him. Diversity wins.
Deciever you should keep this thread going and just delete the ones they patched already.That way we dont have to revote on stuff.
BTW guys deciever is right about fighters countering bombers and anti structure cruisers.The system works well.Its just like he stated.You cant split up your defense nor can you change them aroun on command.
I see deciever's point. He's leaning towards balancing the unit's through fleet synergy, though, relying on other ships to keep your hitter safe. It does make sense, but it would make the game even more complex, and ultimately realistic, if you integrated both viewpoints.
Unit A is tough now, but add in support ships, and it effectively becomes tougher, thereby making your opponent counter both Unit A and support ships to defeat you.
IDK. Just my opinion. I agree one unit shouldn't be able to counter all the siege type units.
I also believe Fighters were meant to be for a defensive role, and Bombers were offensive, so that could be why.
-Exile.
I recently reinstalled Entrenchment and to ease myself back into playing I wound up playing a Small Random vs TEC as Vasari. This wound up turning into a 5, yes FIVE, hour game due to the constant back-and-forth gameplay involved. The MagneticField would have made an excellent choke point (as it, aside from the Pirate Base was the only way into my empire) but I couldnt put a SB there. In addition, it seemed that whenever my back was turned a Raloz would smack an Argonev on my planet. It was pretty horrible as it made me drag portions of my fleet back to take these things on. In the end, I won by sheer force and overpowering their defences, which were drained due to the constant Raloz spam from the AI. The Argonevs were, among numerous other things, placed on the edge of the grav well and just hell to get trade ships through. In their territory I got hit by wave, after wave, of mines.
So: Yay to building SBs in Mag fields and Yay to warning of Ralozes incoming.
These tactical situations are quite different from bombers and assualt cruisers because carriers are not their only counter. Other units counter them and HCs counter LRFs and cap ships are vulnerable to LRFs so tactical diversity is preserved. This is not the case with assualt cruisers and bombers. Tactical diversity IS present, is it just very limited.
Like whisky said, giving assualt cruisers heavy armour would make LFs more useful.
Like Crazyelectron said, this is not the case from the attacker's point of view.
Your point is invalid Juletron, because fighters arent the only thing that counter assault cruisers. Pretty much ANYTHING except certain structures counter them because they cannot attack anything except structures (but even some structures can counter them). But if you want a more specific answer, HC do bonus damage to them, LRF can still kill them, even bombers do a fair amount of damage to them. Fighters just happen to be easy to access for defenses AND get the best bonus. I see what you;re saying about tactical diversity, but you're overlooking the fact that assault cruisers only kill structures, and that means anything can counter them. It's the accompanying fleet that makes them hard to counter, not their armor type. Changing their armor type doesnt change the fact that you need to support them with a fleet or (place any unit here) can and will kill them, and if you're already supporting them with a fleet, then their Armor type DOES NOT MATTER. What does matter is that a defending player whose got his defenses set up for bomber attack can punish players foolish enough to send in a few assault cruisers by themselves to handle things, and doesnt have to leave himself incredibly vulnerable by scrapping his fighters to build bombers, or wasting valuable hangar space on bombers. It allows the defender the CHANCE at saving his expensive defensive cluster before assault cruisers tear it to pieces (which I might add they do quite rapidly and quite well). Changing their armor type to heavy: LFs have enough jobs to do in my mind, and have the most difficult time of any unit to do that job because of the popularity of LRFs. So no, I don't think thats a good plan. LFs are the hard counter to the most units! and yet they are the easiest unit to counter. Adding to their workload is just asking for trouble.
Well, yeah, you can counter them with colony frigates. Is that ever going to happen? Not really. Would like to see them off of light armor, though I agree that heavy doesn't quite work. Very-heavy?
Either this or Heavy. If Very Heavy, then it WOULD force defenders to choose between bombers and fighters.
All the defender needs to do currently is a bit of fighter micromanagement and the assualt cruisers are toast. He is at no disadvantage from sitting on his rear and letting the enemy come after him. If he has his own fleet in the well (as he should) those assualt cruisers are toast from fleet FF and large groups of effective counters (Fighters) focusing on them, no matter how many flak you have. If assault cruisers are less vunerable to fighters, then by building them you actually nullify one of the advantages the opponent has against you, and if the opponent has to build bombers to counter the assault cruisers, he has to make a tactical choice; "Do I build bombers, and risk getting caught with no SC cover, and hope he is slow on the assault, or do I stick with fighters to protect my fleet from enemy bombers, and hope that my fleet can take out the assault cruisers?" Tell me, is that sort of situation not the essence of strategy games?
And if you have been the ingenious person who has built lots of flak to kill off the enemy fighters, please tell me how you will counter the fleet in the gravwell with your autocannon army? Flak are (comparetively) rubbish against anything but SC. You go with a fleet full of Flak and AC, the enemy fleet will clean you up, considering it should be there supporting the defensive structures. If it isn't, lucky you, you probably won six planets ago anyway; you know, when you wiped out his fleet and this is just mopping up a stubborn player, or something?
So, I suggest we add "Change assault cruiser armour type to be less vunerable to fighters?" up there, and see what the public thinks.
Tough choices are what strategy games are all about. I agree that very heavy armour may be a better solution then heavy armour. Using bombers defensively would be a novelty.
Agreed.
I really dont understand this arguement.Its so easy to defend against fighters.20 flak and a few hoshis can probably defend against a heavily fighter based defended planet.Ya you may lose an orgov or 2 but the defender loses all his structures and sb and planet.Makin the defender change as you arrive makes it impossible for the guy to have the chance to kill even 1 ogrov.Against a large fleet with fighters?Bring a kol and park it next to you ogrovs he will lose all his fighters very fast.Again you will lose a few ships but once you have supressed the fighters battle is yours.
The more i think about this, the more i think Deciever is right. Though for me, it's mostly that i see fighters as defense and bombers as offense. IDK. I doubt the devs will make any more changes to the game. THey might launch one or two more patches asfter Diplomacy comes out, to fix bugs, but changing the game outright leaves room for new bugs, and they didn't exactly seem too happy about this last patch we been asking for. I think we should focus on finding bugs, rather than making a wish list. The game does work right now, after all.
-Exile Ascendant
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
