I will start by saying that I absolutely DESPISED mesons in vb aurora and considered them grossly overpowered. I hate anything that can turn combat into a roulette and destroy my dreadnought with a single shot because of bad luck. I always tend to go into very big ships, so they are NOT easily disposable.
I will agree though that in this current iteration there's not much reason to use mesons at all. In Vb aurora mesons also had the advantage of being usable in PDCs, something that other beam weapons could not do. But now that's gone as well.
Do keep in mind what Jorgen cab posted though, you can pair mesons with other weapons that destroy armor.
Frankly at this point, I would rework mesons in a different way. I do not want to see something like the old mesons come back, I hated it.
Maaaaybe something like the Star Wars ion weapons? As in, mesons would have a chance to temporarily disable the components they hit? Useful in a complement with boarding or similar.
Just an idea thrown there.
A thought on Mesons.
Like Microwaves they should be highly specialized, but currently they fill the same basic roll as microwaves, just in reverse. So why not make Mesons "shield killers"? Leave their current armour mechanic alone, but have them be treated as *X more effective against shields. This keeps them specialized as very effective against shield weapons, while still requiring them to pair up with better ant-armour weapons as well. Just off the top of my head, have X be something like 1/(Retardation Factor)^2 against shields. Since they only deal 1 damage ever, that means they will range from doing at minimum tech 4 points of shield damage to at max tech 204 points of shield damage. This does nothing to affect the armour interaction, so the OP chart would remain the same.
What this does is makes Mesons a very space efficient option to take out shielded targets by quickly overloading their targets shield capacity, thus clearing the way for the other weapon packages to take out the armour.
I'd say we agree in premise. Have a primary weapon system, and then a secondary/tertiary which either enhances or compliments the primary, whether for offensive or defensive. By making them "shield busters" they stay situational. Their current mechanic ends up with damage charts like below, which has no real benefit...A thought on Mesons.
Like Microwaves they should be highly specialized, but currently they fill the same basic roll as microwaves, just in reverse. So why not make Mesons "shield killers"? Leave their current armour mechanic alone, but have them be treated as *X more effective against shields. This keeps them specialized as very effective against shield weapons, while still requiring them to pair up with better ant-armour weapons as well. Just off the top of my head, have X be something like 1/(Retardation Factor)^2 against shields. Since they only deal 1 damage ever, that means they will range from doing at minimum tech 4 points of shield damage to at max tech 204 points of shield damage. This does nothing to affect the armour interaction, so the OP chart would remain the same.
What this does is makes Mesons a very space efficient option to take out shielded targets by quickly overloading their targets shield capacity, thus clearing the way for the other weapon packages to take out the armour.
If the conclusion is that Meason is too weak it could be a potential advantage.
I'm not fully convinced that it it is too weak yet though.
One other thing I think is important to point out is that not all weapon need to be made to act as primary weapon class. Currently we have Lasers, Particle Beams and Rail-guns that take the role of primary weapon technologies. In general you don't want to combine those types. You then have Gauss, Meson, Microwave and Carronades which all can be combined with the other to somehow make the whole more efficient than each individual weapon system.
Like Microwave weapons they are not really intended as a main weapon anymore but as a complement to other weapons.
Messon weapons can still be quite effective as it would force the enemy to perhaps make design concessions they otherwise would not have to do.
If you have other weapons that erode the armour your meson will then have an easier time to penetrate it so you will start to do internal damage on the enemy earlier in that case.
So you only want a few Meson and some other primary weapon to combine the effects.
The game are not really that one dimensional. In most of the multi-faction games that I have played the factions that have been the most competitive in combat usually had about three different weapons system that they tried to stay competitive at so they could be more dynamic in their capabilities.
I would say that Measons and Rail-guns combines very well for example...
Ideally I'd actually like to see a weapon that ignores shields, and a separate weapon that ignores armor. That way you have an incentive to mix both shields and armor on all of your warships. And then those two weapons would complement each other, since if you had a 50/50 split on your ships you could fire the shield penetrating weapons at one target and the armor penetrating weapons at another.
Mesons might still be a bit weak, admittedly. What about giving them damage that scales with size- IE, a 20cm meson does more than one damage (regardless of if it hits armor or internal systems). If a larger meson did 3 armor damage in a single column starting wherever the armor blocked it, that would be effectively letting it penetrate two extra layers of armor as well. And it deals with one of the larger concerns about mesons, which was that 10cm was all you ever needed to research.
Ideally I'd actually like to see a weapon that ignores shields, and a separate weapon that ignores armor. That way you have an incentive to mix both shields and armor on all of your warships. And then those two weapons would complement each other, since if you had a 50/50 split on your ships you could fire the shield penetrating weapons at one target and the armor penetrating weapons at another.
Mesons might still be a bit weak, admittedly. What about giving them damage that scales with size- IE, a 20cm meson does more than one damage (regardless of if it hits armor or internal systems). If a larger meson did 3 armor damage in a single column starting wherever the armor blocked it, that would be effectively letting it penetrate two extra layers of armor as well. And it deals with one of the larger concerns about mesons, which was that 10cm was all you ever needed to research.
Thought Microwaves ignored armour but were affected by shields.
Clearly, your pen numbers are backwards (easier to penetrate as tech goes up?) but yes, mesons are awful right now.
| Weapon | ROF | 100 000 km | 200 000 km | 300 000 km | 400 000 km | 1 000 000 km | 1 200 000 km | 1 400 000 km |
| Railgun 50 cm | 15 | 4. 80 | 2. 40 | 1. 60 | 1. 07 | 0. 27 | 0. 27 | 0. 27 |
| Particle beam 50 | 25 | 2. 00 | 2. 00 | 2. 00 | 2. 00 | 2. 00 | 2. 00 | 0. 00 |
| Particle lance 100 | 65 | 1. 54 | 1. 54 | 1. 54 | 1. 54 | 1. 54 | 1. 54 | 0. 00 |
| Laser 80 cm | 35 | 4. 80 | 2. 86 | 1. 91 | 1. 43 | 0. 57 | 0. 46 | 0. 40 |
| Laser 100 cm (spinal) | 55 | 4. 76 | 2. 85 | 1. 89 | 1. 42 | 0. 56 | 0. 47 | 0. 40 |
| Laser 120 cm (adv. spinal) | 80 | 4. 71 | 2. 83 | 1. 88 | 1. 41 | 0. 56 | 0. 46 | 0. 40 |
Like Microwave weapons they are not really intended as a main weapon anymore but as a complement to other weapons.
Messon weapons can still be quite effective as it would force the enemy to perhaps make design concessions they otherwise would not have to do.
If you have other weapons that erode the armour your meson will then have an easier time to penetrate it so you will start to do internal damage on the enemy earlier in that case.
So you only want a few Meson and some other primary weapon to combine the effects.
The game are not really that one dimensional. In most of the multi-faction games that I have played the factions that have been the most competitive in combat usually had about three different weapons system that they tried to stay competitive at so they could be more dynamic in their capabilities.
I would say that Measons and Rail-guns combines very well for example...
The problem is they don't complement other weapons. There's really no reason to take a meson over a 10cm laser or some other beam weapon. Mesons don't complement any other weapon because, while their gimmick is that they ignore shields, they don't do any damage to them, which means to overcome a reasonable mix of shields & armor you need either concentrated lasers (or particle beams or whatever) to keep the shields down, or concentrated mesons to boost your chances of scoring internal damage. If you have a mix of both, your lasers will be deflected by the enemy's shields, and your mesons will be unable to penetrate the armor.
Ideally I'd actually like to see a weapon that ignores shields, and a separate weapon that ignores armor. That way you have an incentive to mix both shields and armor on all of your warships. And then those two weapons would complement each other, since if you had a 50/50 split on your ships you could fire the shield penetrating weapons at one target and the armor penetrating weapons at another.Any sane warship design has both shields and armour, so if the shield penetrator is stopped by armour and the armour penetrator is stopped by shields then using both gains you exactly nothing. Under the current system, any weapon capable of draining the shields and then the ablating armour enough for the mesons to matter is fully capable of downing the target by itself, and a player would be better served by replacing the meson with another of that other weapon. The meson has been reduced to very expensive deadweight.
Mesons might still be a bit weak, admittedly. What about giving them damage that scales with size- IE, a 20cm meson does more than one damage (regardless of if it hits armor or internal systems). If a larger meson did 3 armor damage in a single column starting wherever the armor blocked it, that would be effectively letting it penetrate two extra layers of armor as well. And it deals with one of the larger concerns about mesons, which was that 10cm was all you ever needed to research.
Ideally I'd actually like to see a weapon that ignores shields, and a separate weapon that ignores armor. That way you have an incentive to mix both shields and armor on all of your warships. And then those two weapons would complement each other, since if you had a 50/50 split on your ships you could fire the shield penetrating weapons at one target and the armor penetrating weapons at another.Any sane warship design has both shields and armour, so if the shield penetrator is stopped by armour and the armour penetrator is stopped by shields then using both gains you exactly nothing. Under the current system, any weapon capable of draining the shields and then the ablating armour enough for the mesons to matter is fully capable of downing the target by itself, and a player would be better served by replacing the meson with another of that other weapon. The meson has been reduced to very expensive deadweight.
Mesons might still be a bit weak, admittedly. What about giving them damage that scales with size- IE, a 20cm meson does more than one damage (regardless of if it hits armor or internal systems). If a larger meson did 3 armor damage in a single column starting wherever the armor blocked it, that would be effectively letting it penetrate two extra layers of armor as well. And it deals with one of the larger concerns about mesons, which was that 10cm was all you ever needed to research.
If mesons ignored armour but were blocked by shields, then pairing them with microwaves which IIRC drain shields would be a sound strategy. Being short range weapons, the counter is to kite with longer range weapons.
Ideally I'd actually like to see a weapon that ignores shields, and a separate weapon that ignores armor. That way you have an incentive to mix both shields and armor on all of your warships. And then those two weapons would complement each other, since if you had a 50/50 split on your ships you could fire the shield penetrating weapons at one target and the armor penetrating weapons at another.Any sane warship design has both shields and armour, so if the shield penetrator is stopped by armour and the armour penetrator is stopped by shields then using both gains you exactly nothing. Under the current system, any weapon capable of draining the shields and then the ablating armour enough for the mesons to matter is fully capable of downing the target by itself, and a player would be better served by replacing the meson with another of that other weapon. The meson has been reduced to very expensive deadweight.
Mesons might still be a bit weak, admittedly. What about giving them damage that scales with size- IE, a 20cm meson does more than one damage (regardless of if it hits armor or internal systems). If a larger meson did 3 armor damage in a single column starting wherever the armor blocked it, that would be effectively letting it penetrate two extra layers of armor as well. And it deals with one of the larger concerns about mesons, which was that 10cm was all you ever needed to research.
If mesons ignored armour but were blocked by shields, then pairing them with microwaves which IIRC drain shields would be a sound strategy. Being short range weapons, the counter is to kite with longer range weapons.
Unless something has changed, HPMs do extra damage against shields but can only damage sensors.Ideally I'd actually like to see a weapon that ignores shields, and a separate weapon that ignores armor. That way you have an incentive to mix both shields and armor on all of your warships. And then those two weapons would complement each other, since if you had a 50/50 split on your ships you could fire the shield penetrating weapons at one target and the armor penetrating weapons at another.Any sane warship design has both shields and armour, so if the shield penetrator is stopped by armour and the armour penetrator is stopped by shields then using both gains you exactly nothing. Under the current system, any weapon capable of draining the shields and then the ablating armour enough for the mesons to matter is fully capable of downing the target by itself, and a player would be better served by replacing the meson with another of that other weapon. The meson has been reduced to very expensive deadweight.
Mesons might still be a bit weak, admittedly. What about giving them damage that scales with size- IE, a 20cm meson does more than one damage (regardless of if it hits armor or internal systems). If a larger meson did 3 armor damage in a single column starting wherever the armor blocked it, that would be effectively letting it penetrate two extra layers of armor as well. And it deals with one of the larger concerns about mesons, which was that 10cm was all you ever needed to research.
If mesons ignored armour but were blocked by shields, then pairing them with microwaves which IIRC drain shields would be a sound strategy. Being short range weapons, the counter is to kite with longer range weapons.
Microwaves aren't any more effective against shields than a conventional laser, they just skip armor. And if you have both shield and armor penetrating weapons, then the obvious counter to enemies with both is to just fire the armor penetrating weapons at one enemy ship and the shield penetrating weapons at another.
Microwaves have a damage of 1, and, AFAIK, they do triple damage against shields. So, not that useful when dealing with shields. Maybe if they'd affect the target's shield recharge rate as well.Thank you, I couldn't quite remember. Mesons also have a fixed damage of 1. In both cases armour penetration was their primary advantage over other weapons.
Unless something has changed, HPMs do extra damage against shields but can only damage sensors.
If a weapon ignores shields but is blocked by armour then firing it at an armoured target is pointless. If a weapon ignores armour but is blocked by shields then firing it at a shielded target is also pointless. If the enemy ships have both shields and armour then it makes no difference whether you shoot at the same target or different ones, the guns are equally ineffective.
The problem with current meson cannons is that while they ignore shields they are both blocked by armour and don't do enough damage to meaningfully damage it. Any weapon capable of damaging the armour enough to make the mesons work a) already drained the shields so the meson's sole advantage is nullified, and b) does significantly more damage than the meson so it will fully penetrate the armour and destroy the target by itself before the meson can meaningfully contribute.
That chart seems fine to me. Remember that penetration will accelerate as targets take damage. If your conclusion was that mesons are only effective against no armor at all from that chart I think you are expecting way too much from them. A 10cm Meson Cannon does more dps/ton than a Particle Beam 2, even ignoring penetration.
If there is a problem, it may be on the other end of things, with it being a little too easy imo to slather on enough armor layers that weapon penetration capability becomes not that important vs raw damage for similar tech levels.
Practically everyone agreed that meson fighters were ridiculously over-powered. However, since the AI didn't build them and players could choose not to they were only a problem if you made them one.I encountered a squadron of meson fighters in VB. They blew up my bombers after a failed strike on what I thought was a slow beam armed ship.
That sounds like the swarm, which function different from the other NPRs.Quote from: Father Tim link=topic=11186. msg129971#msg129971 date=1588422955Practically everyone agreed that meson fighters were ridiculously over-powered. However, since the AI didn't build them and players could choose not to they were only a problem if you made them one.I encountered a squadron of meson fighters in VB. They blew up my bombers after a failed strike on what I thought was a slow beam armed ship.
I've only ever seen the swarm alone, this was a pack of 5 with a much faster 200kT friend.Quote from: Migi link=topic=11186. msg130144#msg130144 date=1588455663That sounds like the swarm, which function different from the other NPRs.Quote from: Father Tim link=topic=11186. msg129971#msg129971 date=1588422955Practically everyone agreed that meson fighters were ridiculously over-powered. However, since the AI didn't build them and players could choose not to they were only a problem if you made them one.I encountered a squadron of meson fighters in VB. They blew up my bombers after a failed strike on what I thought was a slow beam armed ship.
I've only ever seen the swarm alone, this was a pack of 5 with a much faster 200kT friend.