While I wouldn't pretend to be an expert on the military techs of all the other races, as I was the one who suggested a complementary military thread to Darvin's survey of financial techs, and no-one else took the hint, I decided to try to produce one.
Planetary Shields- Overrated even before starbases, as they were most useful against siege frigate raids and before the carrier cruiser revision, when the ships couldn't simply take the shield generator out first. When starbases allowed the retention of planets despite bombardment they became wildly overpriced, as what you then pay for is the difference in credit income between a bombed planet and one that isn't bombed, rather than all the investment in infrastructure. They're even higher on the tech tree than the starbase control of planets... on a volcanic planet or roid the Vasari ability to keep planetary control is so much better than this that it becomes derisory.
While the novalith has also lost some of its value due to starbase control of planets, it isn't nearly as badly affected as planetary shields, at least a novalith will still have some targets, whereas anywhere you would have built a shield will have a starbase as a priority.
Solution: Many solutions have been proposed, but the most basic problem is that this tech is just incredibly far up the tech tree for what it does in the game. I would suggest that with the arrival of the starbase control abilities, tier 1 and tier 2 might be more appropriate for the research, unless the effect of the research is radically altered. Even at tier 1 and 2 and with reduced cost, I doubt there would be many of them.
Martyrdom- The seekers have only just disappeared! We don't want them back! However, as this ability costs a ship, the damage might be very poor. I haven't ever seen it used online, and I've seen a great deal, including sort of crop circles made with turrets and my feed being used to build multiple cap ship factories. Having said that I've rarely played Advent so I'm not sure, but I wanted at least one Advent tech in the four.
Solution: Is this damage straight or mitigated? Either way, improving the damage would seem to be a straightforward solution.
Wave weapons- Another perennial is that improvements to wave weapons are too expensive, as they are too high up the tech tree. The tech just requires vast numbers of heavy cruisers to make it remotely viable, rather than building another cruiser.
Solution: The obvious solution would be to bring them into line with other techs, drop them a tier. However, as more variation should always be encouraged, why not make them twice as effective instead, 10% not 5%? Vasari ships still tend to be undergunned, and at a high price this could then be altered.
Pinpoint Bombardment- I'm not sure what this tech was ever intended to achieve, a 13% increase in the range from which bombardment is possible doesn't sound much for a tier 1 tech. You can buy a whole scout for that. I wouldn't buy it.
Solution: This one just needs to be completely redone. If it's to stay where its is on the tech tree then I would suggest that it should allow destructors to also have a ranged anti-structure attack like ersatz assault cruisers, only not nearly as effective. Either that or add to the starbase anti-structure weapon, though then it would belong in a different tree. Maybe both?
So there we are, I'm sure that there are many other candidates and suggestions, but let's stay with military techs rather than capital ships and their abilities, which belong on another thread.
The problem with making carrier caps' SC cost antimatter is that it could very easily shoot them down to be useless. The Halcyon would be less affected (given Telepush is its only regular ability costing antimatter), but both the Sova and Skirantra need antimatter for thier best abilities. The Skirantra would be able to use SB, but the costs of replacing SC would make Repair Cloud a lot harder to use. And the Sova gets a completely unnecessary nerf that makes yet another TEC ship unattractive to use.
Carrier caps already have the lowest DPS of all caps (Skirantra has a base 21), and the lowest bombing damage. Their primary total DPS comes from its Fighters/Bombers. Also, their extensively used because most other capital ships are atrocious. Vasari is an exception, and it can be seen considering that Kortul and Egg starts are fairly common. But Advent has little but the Halcyon/Progen to start, and TEC's only usable caps are Akkan/Sova. The other capital ships just have to be balanced to compete, and this wouldn't be a problem.
The Sova especially doesn't need any nerf. It's horrible late-game.
If anything, the Sova needs a buff so it's useful late game. That's a hard balancing act, as right now it's rock solid early on and we wouldn't want to make it stronger there.
I do agree, but the problem is where to actually buff the Sova. I'd think that giving Rapid Manufacturing a small radius where all carriers/caps around the Sova replace their SC instantly would be very helpful in giving the Sova a fleet support role, but TEC carriers are so uncommon now that it might not change anything. Alternatively, a buff to Missile Batteries could allow them to actually do anything against late-game fleets.
The suggestion is to have a reduced rate of antimatter cost, not the full rate, so that the carrier capitals still have an advantage over carrier cruisers. By itself that would boost the Sova late on, if rapid manufacturing was antimatter-free. It would also boost the L6 Skiranta and Halcyon abilities- perhaps they might need a boost compared to the other supposedly inferior options..? The Skirantra has fewer squadrons and the Halcyon fewer uses for antimatter- I believe that an intention that carrier capitals should need to use antimatter to rebuild squadrons was the original reason that the Halcyon was allowed two passives.. makes sense? This also explains why it became a balance problem and makes it a poor ship to base balance on.
You shouldn't be allowed to get away with poor play entirely for free. It's just not good design. The antimatter cost rate doesn't have to be vast- a quarter, maybe a third or half of the carrier cruiser rate- but it should exist. I doubt that would make carrier capitals useless, and it deserves testing simply because of the strength of the principle.
As you know, the Skirantra base dps is lower because it has phase missiles as part of its forward firepower- though I have base dps as 30, is that right? Only the Vulkoras has more phase missiles, anyway.
The Sova is not a fleet cap late in the game, and was hurt by starbases in its intended role- like Insurgency was, they used to combine... before the era of missions for the winners of the dubiously monitored Mister Pirateverse contest appeared. Also, only once a balance is achieved allowing TEC some late game options at all can the Sova be judged properly, perhaps?
Heres another consideration... won't mines help capitals, once we have them implemented properly? The usual response is that everyone scouts mines... but they don't, and I've lured fleets over minefields many times with damaged capitals. The current trouble is that the mines then do nothing at all to the pursuing LRF.... but I always consider it a moral victory.
However I know that you're both good enough to help with a community patch, even if Darvin might not be able to contribute straight away- are you up for it?
I think a community patch is a little early. Let the devs have a little more time to work on it. They have been busy with Elemental right now.
Once the next patch comes out, that will probably be it, then the community can work on a mod - IF NEEDED!
Hopefully they can get it even closer to perfect balance.
That's Stardock; Ironclad has nothing to do with Elemental (afaik, anyways)
A community mod that would effectively act as a patch... Interesting...
Regardless, I had more or less left assuming that everyone else had as well. Sins's community IMO is a sinking ship, but if there are a few others willing to ride it down to the depths, I'll gladly stay aboard.
As soon as I finish my trig class (my school doesn't have the stupid class in a period I can actually take it so I'm stuck doing a mail-order thing), I'll be free to do whatever. That is of course until I decide to do AP assignments, and scholarship applications, and any other stuff that I need to do but am wanting to put off as much as possible...
I don't know, if there are enough left on the ship, I may just awaken Fleet Diversification from the depths and do something there. Basically, what it comes down to is how many active members have we got left? I figured eh, go check up on the community.
A month or two ago, this was effectively dead, but I saw that there was this active thread in the "my replies." The entire above message was written assuming that this thread could very well be the last of its kind. However, I decided that I ought to see how the community actually is before pressing "Post Reply" and saying something potentially stupid. Well, as I discovered, this is not the last passenger pigeon on an exhibit in some zoo. The community is actually alive, and is certainly not what I had expected. But my question still stands. How many active members have we got left? I saw that Sanchez, Connor, Darvin, Salmon, Ryat and a few others that must have been brought in by the 3.99 or whatever it was deal are still around. Who is left that is going to work hard on something like this? Who do we have? After being gone for the time I have, I would like to know who is actually still around and who has already jumped in a life boat?
Though this is more of an unbased thought, but modifying antimatter costs might be too difficult to balance than going at the main problem; the capital's abilities (Mainly Skirantra in this case), and the power of bombers (Again, mainly Skirantra). Carrier caps loaded with fighters are actually comparable to other caps base DPS- Sova w/ fighters has 69 total DPS, with 36 being Fighter-based; Halcyon has about 23, and Skirantra has 57 (almost entirely phase missiles, so real DPS is higher). While this is higher than most caps, fighter multipliers are extremely low, so the actual total damage a carrier cap deals is far lower against most targets. And carriers get less base damage per level-up than other caps. With bombers, however, carrier cap total DPS increases to the point of eclipsing any other options.
So if bombers were brought into line and caps rebalanced, requiring an antimatter cost shouldn't be necessary. If carriers are still overpowered, then I'd agree with a light antimatter cost. After all, the costs do add up- a hundred or so AM is used to phase jump, and abilities, along with supporting several SC with antimatter may completely keep the carriers drained, similarly to the carrier cruisers right now.
The Skirantra has 11 forward phase missile damage and 10 side-wave damage. Even with phase missiles, it's horrible at actually fighting.
The Sova loses a lot of it's worth because of a lack of fleet support. It's a pretty bad TEC problem for all their caps sans a level 6 Akkan/Dunov to an extent. All their caps really need to be changed to remain useful as fleet support.
Indeed, it would help mines.
I might be able to help with a community patch in a bit. Right now, work hours and other business are preventing me from time on Sins, but I'll gladly help when available.
Perhaps you're right, antimatter use for carrier caps might not be necessary after other changes.
There are changes that are just a matter of adjusting numbers that might have a big effect on the game.. Martyrdom clearly just needs an increase in power, and the hangars an increase in antimatter replenishment.
Mines I would go for a vast increase in firepower combined with a much tougher limit on numbers. They slow the game down and space is too vast to mine properly, in the seas where mine use is basically two dimensions with a very restricted third dimension it was difficult to do more than mine harbour approaches, even given years. A gravity well is a vast area. Gravity mines could very simply be enhanced by being given the ability to explode as well. My problem with the current implementation of mines is that even if you trick the enemy fleet into a minefield, several go off, they achieve nothing and the enemy is alerted. The huge minefields are just never useful anyway, so why have them, instead of smaller numbers of effective mines? Mines used to sink ships, even large armoured ones..
The weapons upgrades could be made more effective. Even if the upgrades other than phase missiles all become 10% rather than 5%, the phase missile upgrades will still be far more effective.
That leaves Planetary Shields and Pinpoint Bombardment. The shields could do with a stats upgrade but because of their high tech level something else seems justified and TEC are poor in the late game. Would an increase to pop caps be simple to implement? How about protection against the superweapons of other factions? A boost to allegiance? A combination? If they can't be moved down the tree there'll have to be some method to boost them.
Pinpoint Bombardment.. why doesn't it bombard, in a pinpoint fashion? That would be a boost to bombardment effect rather than just range? So that there was an increased rate of destruction of fortifications without extra harm to the population? I like increased damage to structures though, it would help Vasari starbases when attacking other starbases. Again, if it stays where it is on the tech tree it will need substantial help on its effect.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
