Given that we're currently in beta for a new patch, I felt it would be a good time to propose some changes for a few underused capital ships and capital ship abilities.
To the developers: I disclaim all ownership of the following suggestions; if you take them, or some variation on them, I will demonstrate nothing but gratitude that they are present and usable in the finished game.
The Kol Battleship:
The Revelation Battlecruiser:
The Radiance Battleship:
The Skirantra Carrier:
The Antorak Marauder:
My rationale for this suggestion: Subversion is both highly circumstantial (it only has an effect if there is an active factory or active orbital construction process in place) but also pathetic compared to Embargo, which does more economic damage and provides the TEC player money! Rather than attempt to play with the other economic values by which Subversion could be more effective against the opposing player (culture, which is more of an Advent thing; extractor income, which is actually a very Vasari thing to mess with [being expert in mining operations]; or planetary construction projects, which is more of a TEC thing to mess with), I felt that the Marauder should stick to what it does best: messing with phase space. In addition, the potential advantages to be gained by preventing reinforcements from arriving at a planet can only emphasize the Marauder's deadliness as a hit-and-run attacker.
The Rankulas Battleship:
As indicated here (https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/451038/page/1/), there seems to be some consensus that the Rankulas could be buffed. General suggestion trends are as follows:
The Rapture Battlecruiser:
Please discuss any aspect of these suggestions. My goal, as ever, is to buff underused ships and abilities; I can't abide something that's in a game to no purpose.
If subversion was comparable to embargo in utility, it might not be a bad ship...
Would subversion be any better if it stole a percentage of resource income from the planet it was cast on on addition to everything it currently does?
EDIT: Frostflare, could we get the OP updated since Gauss Rail Gun now bypasses shields. Just something I noticed. Maybe just put a strikethrough on it and we can continue this thread until we check everything off the list so to speak
What the Marauder needs is viability in battle. Something that you can use to properly impact a fight, maybe not by brute force and tons of damage, maybe it has to work in a more indirect way, but it has to have some purpose until it's level 7, when being able to zzap around behind enemy lines, act as a phase stabilizer and interrupt powerful enemy abilities actually becomes important.
Absolutely with you here on this one; it's probably got the worst DPS of all the Vasari cap ships taking into account everything it can do. Even taking a moderately defended neutral planet is a real bother with this ship (it's definitely worse than the Rankulas ).
In addition to the OP suggestion, perhaps it could reduce antimatter lost on the jump. One of the other problems with using the Marauder in the way intended is that you don't have enough AM when you arrive to do anything useful, particularly if you've then got to leave in a hurry.
You suggestion sounds complicated: I don't know if that sounds like what the ability was intended to be used for. On the offensive side, POH should damage hull directly like GRG now does: having it damage only shields means the damage is useless half-way into a battle, not to mention shield mitigated. Also, the protection effect would be significantly boosted by allowing passive regeneration of friendly ships. It would then be more effective at protecting a nearly dead ship or it could be used to protect a cap ship/titan from AM drain or destruction until it can cast its ability.
Why shouldn't there be? One is a passive, the other an activated ability. And as the Animosity build of the Radiance needs A LOT more durability than an offensive DA build, why shouldn't the skill it is based on also give a defensive buff?
I don't think it needs to steal resources, it just needs to apply some sort of economic debuff. Tax income or a nerf to resource extraction maybe. Could also do a one off allegiance reduction like the Deliverance Engine.
Oh. Heh. I'm sorry if it wasn't clear. I was saying that Energy Absorptive Armor shouldn't have more than one durability buff (it's confusing IMO otherwise), but I wasn't referring to Animosity. Frostflare had suggested both an armor boost and a shield mitigation boost, you see.
As for Animosity, I agree it's a very reasonable option to equip it with some sort of durability buff, but wouldn't a DR on taunted units make for a more interesting/varied set of potential strategies in comparison?
Do you mean reducing the damage those ships are doing or giving them a negative damage reduction (I.e. making them more vulnerable to damage)? There's two types of damage reduction in the code, Dealer and Target, and just using DR is a bit confusing.
I'd be happy with subversion debuffing tax income and/or allegiance...I'd even be tempted to make it passive just to solve the AM problem....
Okay, there's a LOT to address here and I'm still collating; I didn't expect the thread to explode.
That said, here are my initial thoughts:
So, on the subject of Energy-Absorptive Armor, here is my reasoning:
Though I welcome any argument, I should note that, as with any proposed change, any discussion is ultimately theoretical (and can boil down to my bias against your bias); extensive testing would be necessary to assess whether or not the Radiance in this state would, in fact, be OP.
Comments?
GRG does hull damage only...that inherently means it bypasses shields and shield mitigation....
Okay. I meant negative damage reduction (=vulnerability to damage), which in my defense is in my original post. That said, the game calls reducing/increasing incoming damage "Damage Reduction" and reducing/increasing weapon damage "Damage Output", which is the convention I use, so I'm not sure why this should be confusing (apart from, as you say, if you speak in entity code).
See the 1.80 patch notes. I was under the impression that this thread was part of the inspiration for the change. (https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/449882/page/2/#3418314)
This would work independently of Animosity, and I thus don't see how it would encourage you to choose it as an ability; a few enemy cap ships, a titan, AOE or in fact, strikecraft, would grant the necessary incoming hits to charge up the stack even if nothing else is focus firing your cap ship.
So why not combine the two as Damage Reduction then? It's multiplicative like mitigation but also independent of PMs and shield bypass. It's also always on, so you don't need to take damage.
Sorry. Accidental double post. Please could a mod delete this?
If these suggestions would be published as a mod, I would fucking buy it, for I really like most of them. That said, this stuff will likely never be incorporated into the Rebellion exe itself...
Wow, I didn't even SEE that in the patch notes about the Kol! Good to know!
@Agaricus:
If a damage buff on EAA like the one I suggested was not sufficient incentive to use Animosity, then perhaps the suggested damage increase needs to be lowered from 5% to 1%; suddenly, Animosity becomes a way to guarantee to the damage increase, creating synergy.
As for your question (which I did, in fact, consider when formulating the original post), I have two answers:
I'll grant you: converting the armor component and the shield mitigation component of my proposition for EAA into a flat damage reduction is tempting, and it is certainly elegant. But I kinda like the picture painted by the ability thus far, ya know?
In short: I can think of no compelling reason NOT to follow your suggestion other than personal preference.
@Teun-A-Roonius:
Aww, you know how to make a grown man blush.
EDIT: Having looked through a number of your suggestions for the Marauder, I'm going to modify the OP with what I felt were the best suggestions.
I will likewise include a link to N3rull's discussion in the OP, with regard to the Rankulas, because I don't think the community has settled on the most effective means of buffing the Rankulas. I will include a summary of the suggestions, though.
Regarding Energy Absorption Armor and Adaptive Forcefield, why not just swap the two (in addition to making AF passive)?
Lore wise it makes more sense. Armor improvements seem more fitting for TEC and shield advancments make more sense coming from Advent.
Gameplay mechanics-wise, EAA plays to the Kol's strengths (making good armor better, synergizes extremely well with Kol's serious AM burn-rate) and AF plays to the Radiance's (flat DR better protects it relatively low armor weaker hull [as well as its more-important shields, correct me if I'm wrong] while also helping protect against Advent's bane: phase missiles. This synergizes extremely well with the taunt.
I think AF would still need to be made passive for the Radiance (though the need would be less dire).
@Badday2:
I like the way you think; in fact, I will reward you karma for it!
Here is why I like your suggestion:
For one thing, armor would be more within the TEC philosophy than Adaptive Forcefield; for another, Energy Absorptive Armor would solve a lot of the Kol's energy problems. Likewise, Adaptive Forcefield would solve a lot of the Radiance's problems.
My only two counter-arguments are as follows:
Your suggestion remains a good one, though; keep thinking outside the box!
There is a certain logic to this, however I think there is some value in having a few abilities that don't fall into the expected strengths of a faction. Also an energy absorbing force field sounds a little weirder than armor, and I think the Antimatter from damage part is important for the Radiance.
Yeah I got that impression originally, but your second post made me unsure. And yes, I probably know the entity code better than the in game strings .
Anyways, while I guess it wouldn't be an illogical thing lore wise, I feel the Radiance would be better served by a defensive buff. You might have situations where you want to use animosity as a stalling action, perhaps to protect an under construction starbase, with some guardians, a progen and some repair bays as support. In this case you won't really have any means to attack a decent sized enemy fleet effectively, so the increased damage is effectively meaningless. In all cases the Radiance will be absorbing fire, so a buff that reduces the damage it takes will also be appreciated.
Since Animosity is a debuff, perhaps it would be more consistent to place a damage dealt reduction on ships affected by taunt, rather than a damage reduction on the Radiance as I usually do? This would help with units like flak, capitalships and titans (if they can be taunted) that can fire at multiple targets even while taunted.
Things that do damage directly to hull, like phase missile or the Evacuator's nanites, do indeed bypass shield mitigation as well as the shields themselves.
Can I take you up on that? All cheques and bank transfers are welcome.
But seriously, do people want a sandbox-type mod for balancing suggestions? Most of the mentioned abilities can be either modded directly or approximated using an alternative (e.g. Subversion breaking phase links -> VR bidirectional jamming) and I would be willing to maintain the project while there is interest.
To be honest, the community seems to have reached a rough consensus that most of these changes would work. The next logical step is testing them, and a mod is an ideal way of doing that. In addition, a mod would allow us to refine these suggestions and report on their efficacy. Finally, testing the suggestions ourselves, and publishing a mod that allows the community to do so, saves the devs effort and makes some of these suggestions more likely to be implemented in the future.
Unfortunately, I'm not a modder, so the most I can offer is support and testing once you publish the mod.
To that end, I shall list the abilities from which you would need to cull:
If you want my honest opinion, I think we should hold off on the Rankulas changes until the community has reached a consensus in N3rull's thread.
What do you think?
EDIT: Whoops! I forgot -- mad karma for your suggestion!
Heh. Already started, although I had tested some things before. If there is more support, then I'll post it up.
Actually, one thing about FB and TP is that they act instantly; this means that you need to micro them accurately or they will miss most of their targets. Additionally, the alpha strike is likely to be in full swing before enough SC are within range of the ability, which may make the ability ineffective for reasons you have already described. Jam Weapons disables weapons on all ships entering range every 2s for 20s, which is comparatively OP; you can cast it in advance (less micro required, ship less likely to be damaged) and it mitigates the alpha strike even if the bombers are spread out. I was thus intending to buff both abilities so they will deal the described effects to all SC entering range for a short duration (e.g. 2 or 3s), rather than only SCs in range at the time you cast. Does this sound reasonable?
Agree with the latter, if only because "I'd like EAA to be distinct from Adaptive Forcefield (active or passive)" . I will not add the armor buff until it's clear the Radiance really needs a specific durability boost (it's otherwise balanced). The former will be integrated into one of the options for Animosity for now.
There are a few other minor ability suggestions that I have made that I will also incorporate into the mod. My plan is to make it as modular as possible, so all you need to do is swap in or out the things you dislike from the base improvements if you object to any of them.
Baby steps, Agaricus, baby steps!
I'm flattered beyond all measure that you decided to make the mod, but if there's anything I've learned from agile development in my day job: iterate; gather data; respond to data; iterate.
Consequently, I recommend starting with the base values in the OP (where possible) and then iterating from there.
Though your suggestion is a good one, particularly based on your comparison to the Kortul, I worry that it might jeopardize faction differentiation. Though less "noob-friendly" than Jam Weapons, I rather like the element of skill required by TK Push and Flak Burst. There is room to play with the abilities as proposed.
For example: at rank 4, Flak Burst as I have designed it causes strike craft to miss at a rate of 50%.
But maybe that's not enough. So:
Of course, Flak Burst also does DAMAGE. I know for a fact that two Kols using Flak Burst will utterly annihilate any strike craft entering the envelope, so the effectiveness of the debuff needs to be balanced against Flak Burst's killing power. Even a single Kol using Flak Burst will weaken strike craft significantly, making them easier prey for escorts.
Likewise, maybe we need to play with some of the values on TK Push, as well.
Consequently, I recommend testing before we manipulate values.
Can't wait to see a changelog!
Also: would anyone here be willing to test the changes and report back? The more testers, the more feedback.
Also: MOAR KARMA!
It's not skill when the lag fest prevents you from doing jack shit late game...it really isn't viable to micro TK push or flak burst half the time, and more to the point, it is actually extremely difficult to tell how many SC are in range of the ability at any given time since the HUD icons represent the squad and not the actual SC...
I play SP with a personal mod that made FB and TK push act in waves...works beautifully...
Okay. Hopefully there is interest; you can find the mod here.
Holy shit, you actually incorporated that stuff into a mod? Here's some karma bro!
Nobody? Who are those people you are refering to?
Are you serious?... The Akkan is the (second) best TEC capital ship, almost vital in the early game and useful asset late game. In skilled multi I haven't seen a differing starter than Akkan or sometimes Marza as TEC. And I don't think in a half year suddenly all the other capital ships became favourites and the Akkan became obsolete.
Single player mode, the Akkan is not the best, but still a good cap, not that trash you call it.
Ion Bolt can make an almost dead escaping enemy ship (cap or titan) dead, as it interrupts phase charging giving your fleet more time do kill that fleeing piece of litter having less than 100 hitpoints, and it interrupts EVERY ability that needs to be actively used for several seconds like the Missile Barrage or Shield Recharge. Oh, and the only interruption the TEC has if I remember correctly.
Targeting Uplink is a nice support ability, higher range means your ships will do the first strike, and that is something. The chance to hit mainly improves flak, and there are circumstances flak are useful to have more successful hits... like always? Oh, and have you seen what that range increase does to your titan firing range? Take a look at the Ragnarov, that 20% increase is something to behold.
Colonization ability is a nice one too, speeds up your expansion as hell, and gives an awesome early game economy boost. Main reason in MP to build this ship as your starter.
And last, the Armistice can prevent the loss of your fleet in an already lost battle, and can save your ships even from a Red Button explosion if you time it right.
TLDR: Calling this ship trash is not the most intelligent thing to do as every ability is useful in it's way, seems like you haven't used this ship properly, ever.
No the dunov is the best capital ship.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
