Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
C# Mechanics / Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Last post by Garfunkel on Today at 09:07:48 PM »
What a weird page! Just lot of black bars  ;D

It's good that everyone is using spoiler tags because I for one want to be surprised when 1.14 hits so cheers!
2
NPRs do perform squadron jumps as part of JP assaults.
3
C# Mechanics / Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Last post by Bremen on Today at 07:42:41 PM »
I could just remove the ECM advantage, or lower the tech generally. However, as most of the raiders are single ships, I don't want the 'solution' to simply be a basic design with box launchers that guards each colony and escorts every convoy. That isn't adding anything meaningful to the game. They need to present a challenge, or there is no point in having them.

The Raiders don't present an existential threat because of the serious limitations on their numbers and movement. You can present a serious tactical or operational threat due to powerful ships, without being an existential threat to the whole Empire.


I think this is a good goal, but after giving it some thought I think the end result is the exact opposite you're going for.

The raiders are very fast - which makes sense because they're raiders. They have high ECM, for the same reason. And they have long range beam weapons and no missiles as the design goal you're going for.

The net result is that even a single ship is a massive threat to entire fleets if they don't have specialized counters (like high accuracy short range missiles or a lot of beam fighters/FACs). You can't count on killing them with beams since they're probably faster (because raiders) and probably outrange you (because of the powerful ECM and tech advantage), so it doesn't matter if you have a dozen beam battleships, a single raider can potentially eventually kill them all by kiting.  And a dozen missile battleships can easily be useless as well, as shown by the 0% hit rate in the update. And the raiders won't run out of ammo, since they use beams and not missiles, so you don't even have the prospect of escaping with some of your fleet once they run dry.

So... honestly I think one or more box launcher ships with special anti-raider missiles for each colony and fleet is probably exactly the counter we're likely to see most players use against raiders at low tech levels.


ECM is just too all or nothing, having ECM 10, even against ECCM 3 seems to give fleets virtual immunity, you can test this out really well on heavily fortified STO worlds like NPR homeworlds, where you can get attacked by 100s of shots every 5s and not have a single one hit over periods of days. ECM should give a major advantage but I don't think the all-or-nothing state its currently in is really good.

Honestly ECM 10 vs ECCM 3 probably should be virtual immunity, that's a huge tech difference. My concern is that since it's additive rather than multiplicative even a 1 or 2 tier ECM difference can be the difference between a decent number of hits and 0% hit chance, especially at long range in a game where kiting is already a very dominant tactic.
4
C# Suggestions / Re: C# Suggestions
« Last post by Nori on Today at 07:18:04 PM »
The last few games I've been playing I do so without jump engines. I just build stabilization ships and only go places that have gates. It slows down exploration, but frees up a lot of space on ships (or frees up a ship type) and it frees up my PP scientists from having to research Jumpy stuff.

Given all that, I was thinking that it would be interesting if gates could be destroyed. Forcing your opponent to use jump engines could be viable. Not sure how the NPRs would decide when a gate should be removed or not and it could be annoying if they snuck into a transit system and destroyed a gate...

I wonder how you handle JP assaults without squadron jump, although you could just use a single/couple specialized jump ships for that.
I haven't really run into any issues. I just do a standard transit for the entire fleet and that's worked just fine thus far.
5
C# Mechanics / Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Last post by Droll on Today at 05:45:05 PM »

The 186 torpedoes all missing also makes me think it might be worth considering a change to how ECM/ECCM works. IIRC, currently if you have a 30% chance to hit, 20% worth of ECM reduces that to a 10% chance; when the ECM % exceeds the base hit chance you get situations like the Imperium is facing. I wonder if wouldn't be better to make it multiplicative, so a 20% reduction to a 30% hit chance would be 30% * (1-.2) = 24%. To make up for the reduction it might be good to increase the effect of each ECM tier to 20% and make them cumulative, so a two tier difference would be (1-.2)^2 = .64, so a 36% reduction.


I think the changes to ECM suggested here are good, otherwise I really like the power level that our new spoiler friends are at. Honestly though, if you want to make them less powerful - Tone down raider weapons a bit, and instead make the invaders much more powerful. From my experience the invaders are quite disappointing compared to what they were in VB6.

ECM is just too all or nothing, having ECM 10, even against ECCM 3 seems to give fleets virtual immunity, you can test this out really well on heavily fortified STO worlds like NPR homeworlds, where you can get attacked by 100s of shots every 5s and not have a single one hit over periods of days. ECM should give a major advantage but I don't think the all-or-nothing state its currently in is really good.
6
C# Suggestions / Re: C# Suggestions
« Last post by Droll on Today at 05:27:22 PM »
The last few games I've been playing I do so without jump engines. I just build stabilization ships and only go places that have gates. It slows down exploration, but frees up a lot of space on ships (or frees up a ship type) and it frees up my PP scientists from having to research Jumpy stuff.

Given all that, I was thinking that it would be interesting if gates could be destroyed. Forcing your opponent to use jump engines could be viable. Not sure how the NPRs would decide when a gate should be removed or not and it could be annoying if they snuck into a transit system and destroyed a gate...

I wonder how you handle JP assaults without squadron jump, although you could just use a single/couple specialized jump ships for that.
7
C# Mechanics / Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Last post by Borealis4x on Today at 04:47:11 PM »
I could just remove the ECM advantage, or lower the tech generally. However, as most of the raiders are single ships, I don't want the 'solution' to simply be a basic design with box launchers that guards each colony and escorts every convoy. That isn't adding anything meaningful to the game. They need to present a challenge, or there is no point in having them.

The Raiders don't present an existential threat because of the serious limitations on their numbers and movement. You can present a serious tactical or operational threat due to powerful ships, without being an existential threat to the whole Empire.


Having to conscientiously design, build and deploy dedicated light patrol forces all throughout our empire in order to get good enough coverage to deal with any raiders that pop up is already enough of an addition without making the raiders themselves very strong. The challenge isn't in actually fighting raiders, its in catching them before they can catch your unarmed transports.

The Battle of the Atlantic was 'fought' with largely second-hand ships compared to the Pacific since they didn't expect to fight pitched naval battles there. The challenge for Allied planners was to organize a system where they could efficiently safeguard their commercial vessels. Raiders should force players to think along the same lines; where am I most vulnerable to raids, how can I efficiently respond to them, and what sorts of designs can fill this role without infringing too much on the budget of my proper front-line fleet?

The actual quality of the Raiders doesn't matter as long as they can consistently threaten undefended commercial ships and lone escorts.
8
C# Mechanics / Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Last post by Bremen on Today at 03:56:52 PM »
I like the fact they have high ECM actually because that make them uniquely different from other threats and demand a special consideration from the player. The suggestion to tweak the ECM math a bit makes sense to me too, abrupt cutoff of missile chance to hit with insufficient ECCM and speed is harsh. It should still be very small chance to hit of course with a big tech disadvantage. I really like the suggestion to give them some of that stealth tech that reduce active sensor profile.

If they will truly not engage a superior force despite the fact they could technically wipe them out that does alleviate a bit my concern as they won't do crippling damage, just potentially large economic damage that the empire can recover from.

It should be interesting to have them pop up during a stand off with one of the NPR. Observing the conflict will yield very valuable intel.


In the test campaign a Raider ship attacked a world with around 3x (I think) its tonnage in military ships in orbit, and a sizeable number of STO units on the ground, so it's not like they turn and run at any opposition. It did lose, but really only because the AI allowed itself to be drawn into close range of the STO weapons.
9
C# Mechanics / Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Last post by nuclearslurpee on Today at 03:54:30 PM »
I could just remove the ECM advantage, or lower the tech generally. However, as most of the raiders are single ships, I don't want the 'solution' to simply be a basic design with box launchers that guards each colony and escorts every convoy. That isn't adding anything meaningful to the game. They need to present a challenge, or there is no point in having them.

The Raiders don't present an existential threat because of the serious limitations on their numbers and movement. You can present a serious tactical or operational threat due to powerful ships, without being an existential threat to the whole Empire.


Broadly I agree, I think the flavor of the new encounter type is unique and poses interesting challenges as the Gothic AAR shows. Turning the raiders into a puzzle which has a known solution is not exciting gameplay as stated.

That said, I think the major concern is not that the raiders do present a threat, but more whether such a threat can be countered effectively early in the game. Mainly I would worry about standard starts at lower populations such as the default 500m, when a reasonable starting tech setup (80k RP) likely struggles to catch the raiders, is outranged by the raiders allowing a fleet to be kited, and would struggle to hit the raiders with even the most accurate possible missiles. As noted it is possible to overcome this, e.g. with well-designed specialized missiles or boosted FACs, but the set of options is limited and I suspect that many players may find these constrained options do not always match the RP setting they wish to play. Which is not necessarily a problem, as the raiders can simply be turned off for that campaign, but I suppose the question is whether so many players will turn them off in favor of their preferred RP leaving relatively few who actually play with the new spoilers? I do wonder if delaying their first appearances depending on the starting population is possible, this might be a reasonable compromise for lower-pop starts.

All this being said, I keep thinking that the comparison to the Swarm is interesting, as they are a very dangerous race but are generally well-liked as game content despite the existential threat and horror stories of campaigns being aborted early on due to a Swarm invading the home system. So while the new raiders seem difficult I am optimistic that they can work out equally well.
10
C# Suggestions / Re: C# Suggestions
« Last post by Nori on Today at 03:49:38 PM »
The last few games I've been playing I do so without jump engines. I just build stabilization ships and only go places that have gates. It slows down exploration, but frees up a lot of space on ships (or frees up a ship type) and it frees up my PP scientists from having to research Jumpy stuff.

Given all that, I was thinking that it would be interesting if gates could be destroyed. Forcing your opponent to use jump engines could be viable. Not sure how the NPRs would decide when a gate should be removed or not and it could be annoying if they snuck into a transit system and destroyed a gate...
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk