Well day one of 1.04 has more or less been a a whine-fest about what hasn't been fixed- most focus on the still broken VR and some on wail. Well how about some positive feedback?
Frankly while it didn't fix everything(which a single patch can't really be expected to), honestly I think it was a fairly productive patch.
New damage type for corvettes is great, I'm stoked over what is probably the most significant AL buff since beta, and a very nice step towards reducing how central titans are to rebellion gameplay(via level-scaling costs/build time on downed titans).
So anyway, let's take a break from all the negativity if only for this thread- post your favorite change and what you think this patch did right.
The TL regained some of their power when the Ankylon gut buffed. Now it looks more like it did when on the TEC had been released in beta.
Don't forget the superweapon cap change.
That too. The TL get that advantage too. I'd say that one is probably more useful in SP though, since Novalith's are easy to counter in MP matches.
They're not easy to "counter" per say, all you do is prevent them from killing you directly. There is nothing you can do about the economic debuffs Novaliths bring however. Half trade income and -40% population for a half hour is probably the biggest debuff in the game, and is the ultimate weapon in a war of attrition.
I've definitely been thinking the same thing- TEC loyal fleets may actually be able to survive titan AoE now.
That said I do feel compelled to mention that group shield doesn't make titan AoE "negligible". It's a very significant reduction, but remember that due to how sins math works "-86% damage taken" actually reduces the incoming damage by about 46.3%. SO just a bit more then half of incoming damage gets by area group shield(though that damage will also get mitigated by shield mitigation and if hitting hull armor). The only exceptions to this sort of math as far as I know is shield mitigation and the Iconus Guardian's shield projection. Basically if it says in the description the word "reduces" it generally means it uses sins math.
The point is I wouldn't say negligible- but shaving off almost half the damage of AoEs right off the bat could very easily be enough to keep frigates alive long enough to matter.
Oh, I knew Sins math was weird, but I didn't know it was THAT weird. Thanks for the clarification. Like.. why would they even make it that way? That doesn't make any sense at all e.e.
if you're at all interested in how it's done it's pretty simple:
Sins reductions basically tell you the yield for the change. Which is to say "86% reduced damage" actually means the damage is reduced by the amount that results in the ship being able to take 86% more damage before being destroyed(so +86% effective HP while the buff is up). Before I get into the details I'd like to reiterate that this representation change is only for reductions- Increases work exactly as one would expect.
Mathematically this is pretty simple, take the % of the reduction and put it in decimal form(so in this case 86/100=.86). Add that to 1(so in this case 1.86), and finally take the inverse of that number((1/1.86)=roughly .538). The result is basically what is left of the reduced stat. So if our final result is .538 it means 53.8% of damage gets through the "86% reduced damage" shield, which translates into a 46.2% reduction to damage.
While most people find it very stranger, this representation of reductions is actually very useful. Measuring the effective yield of the reduction actually protrays a much more intuitive explanation of the magnitude of the effect(for example knowing the buff will make ships live 82% longer is often more useful then knowing they are taking 46.2% less damage).
Another advantage is that it creates uncapped potential for reduction- You can have any number of reductions stack additively without issue as you never hit a point where the affected number is reduced to 0, nor does it suffer from the increasing returns that normally accompany normal percentile representations. This is the reason it's balanced that every single reduction in sins stacks additively with each other such reduction(note most games with normal percentile representations lots of abilities have to impose stacking limitations).
It only really seems odd to use because most other games use the "traditional" protrayal of just giving us the reduction.
Anyway this post turned out a bit longer then I expected- I always like discussing the sins reduction representation when I get the chance.
As a rule of thumb, -100% usually means reduced by half. This is nice as it means a positive buff and a negative buff will always cancel out each other (I.e. if you half an amount with -100% then increase it by 100%, you're back to base value).
That said, Sins is sometimes inconsistent with these thing. The "Income Stealing" effect of the Sova's Embargo and the Max population reduction on the Novalith Cannon for example both use "Traditional" systems, so 100% actually means everything. There are probably a few others I'm missing right now too.
Shield mitigation is also a traditional percentage (which is why its so powerful), so if you have targets that already have max shield mitigation (57%) and under the influence of group shield, you get the .538 * (1 - .57) = 0.23, so your ships are only taking 1/4 of the absolute damage.
Yes, it is indeed somewhat strange. Not only does is have by far the most firepower, but it also can have phase missiles which drastically improve that firepower even further. Should you have the misfortune of it being close to your jump in point, I think it will do actually more damage than Meteor Storm in the same ammount of time.
I also agree with the Tec Loyalist... their starbases need some serious love.
A fully upgraded TEC Loyalist Starbase should blow a fully upgraded Orkulus Starbase out of the sky. if it doesnt... the point of the faction is moot.
Aye I noted Shield mitigation in my first post.
That said it actually is consistent once you know the rules. Generally it usses the unusual sins representation if it is phrased as "reduces <insert stat or damage here>". or "-X <insert stat or damage here>"/ Basically if it focuses on the point that it's applying a negative adjustment to a stat that(which is to say it's a negative valued modifer) could just as easily have been applied positively as a buff.
Anything that Steals, redirects, propagates ect... a % uses the conventional %. It's just negative valued modifiers(that could just as easily support a positive value) that use the funky sins representations.
Also as I implied just now, I believe Iconus Guardian shield Projection also redirects the listed percentile(actually 33% of incoming damage).
[EDIT: oh my, did we talk about numbers too much and drive away all the people responding? Wouldn't be the first time for me ]
The problem with that is that the Orkulus Star Base is suppose to be the Vasari's Anti-Structure (and that includes Star Bases) weapon. Its first weapon upgrade is a weapon that is excellent for attacking structures.
not to mention it's got more weapons & hull upgrades then any other starbase and probably the best damage mitigating active in the game which starbases can't avoid as they can't circle around behind the orky like ships can.
A fully upgraded orky will wreck a fully upgraded Transcendia or Argonev without breaking a sweat. A couple TEC loyal techs isn't going to change that IMO.
2 TEC loyal starbases could probably beat an orky though if the orky had no backup.
I understand your point Ryat.
But please try to understand my point:
If I am TEC... I have placed that starbase there for a single purpose... to hold of the enemy because my fleet right now is too far away or otherwise busy. That starbases job is simple. HOLD THE LINE. Or if that is not possible, at least make it damm costly for getting by.
Same for Advent
Now... you go there... build a Orkulus nicely out of range of my SB.... which usually is possible without much of a trouble, unless the defending starbase has full bombers onboard... which is not necessarly a good idea for various reasons.
You upgrade that starbase.... and then it moves into range and attacks my starbase.
My starbase dies....
Now... anwer me a single question: What did it bring me to build the starbase there in the first place? Nothing.
In the contrary... now when my fleet finally has time to get there... I will face a fully upgraded starbase at (hopefully) still MY planet..... and I will loose ships to that monster....
So I paid:
Starbase construction and upgrade
Fleet losses
Possible planet loss as it is defenseless - economic penalty
loss of all logistic structures arround the planet - economic penalty
All that I paid... and I got nothing for it.
The Vasari paid:
AND:
The Vasari still has a very useful starbase at that planet.... so he got a lot of nice things for the money he paid.
I have no problem with the Orky being the anti structure weapon of the Vasari.... but I expect that in a straight fight against another starbase (same tech level, same upgrades) it should loose.
Because:
The Orky is far more usefull generaly than the Anti structure cruisers of TEC or Advent
- it does actually counter those anti structure cruisers quite well...
- the cruisers cost fleet supply... and you need to spent far more money on them than on the Orky...because see one line above)
- after the job is done... they are worthless.
I am fine if the Advent or TEC starbase is heavily damaged after that.... but not destroyed. Being stationary, they should outlast the mobile Orky.
I am actually curios now... I am going to try this in Dev.exe.
I'm only going to say this once, as Ryat has said already, the Orky is the Vasari structure killer. Just because you expect your SB to "HOLD THE LINE" doesn't mean that is how the game actually works. Sometimes you have to face reality and adjust your tactics to compensate. FYI, anything in the right number will kill a SB. So your "HOLD THE LINE" point is completely invalid. You know how much care it takes, money, and time it takes to get a fully upped Orky? Especially if building within the enemy gravity well? If this happens to you, you get what's coming to you, which is certain defeat.
Have your own Anti-Structural weapons on stand by then. Bombers in hangars work great for leveling that odds there.
Oh How, stop trolling...throw in some skirantras and overseers and it ain't so bad...building a fresh Orky may take some skill but it is by no means a finesse art...even if it fails odds are your enemy wasted a ton of time moving to get in range of the fresh SB, putting themselves in presumably a poorer tactical position while simultaneously taking losses...
Early game, skirantra repair makes it hard to kill unless you are vasari (tier 1 kanraks + nano disassemblers)...it can be countered (easier to do so as Vasari or TEC) but it is a pain to do so if the Vasari player knows what they are doing...
Oh plz stop trolling....
Hmmm...... I realize this thread has gone totally off course. Yay 1.04!
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
