Author Topic: v2.0.0 Changes Discussion Thread  (Read 122717 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bremen

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • B
  • Posts: 743
  • Thanked: 150 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #120 on: June 22, 2021, 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.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2021, 09:21:30 PM by Bremen »
 
The following users thanked this post: Droll, Gabrote42

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2781
  • Thanked: 1048 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #121 on: June 22, 2021, 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!
 
The following users thanked this post: LiquidGold2

Offline MarcAFK

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2005
  • Thanked: 134 times
  • ...it's so simple an idiot could have devised it..
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #122 on: June 23, 2021, 01:12:42 AM »
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!
To be honest I'm kind of annoyed I read the spoilers. The mechancs are interesting and I love reading it but now I feel spoiled. I hope I forget everything by the time 1.14 drops.
" Why is this godforsaken hellhole worth dying for? "
". . .  We know nothing about them, their language, their history or what they look like.  But we can assume this.  They stand for everything we don't stand for.  Also they told me you guys look like dorks. "
"Stop exploding, you cowards.  "
 

Offline Zincat

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Z
  • Posts: 566
  • Thanked: 111 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #123 on: June 23, 2021, 09:37:31 AM »
I would not change anything. The raiders are fine as they are, the ECM mechanics look like they are immensely fun, and it's a different threat compared to anything else in-game right now.
Making it easier to counter would only make it irrelevant.


It's an OPTIONAL spoiler race. You're not obligated to turn it on. You're not obligated to turn it on immediately.
You can just decide to wait a few years and THEN turn it on, if you prefer.
If I start conventional with reduced research, I don't turn on invaders until I have a couple of tech levels, for example.

And if you have it on from the start and you die? Losing is fun! Since when are we afraid of losing  ;D ;D ;D?
 
The following users thanked this post: papent, DEEPenergy, LiquidGold2, Gabrote42

Offline ISN

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • I
  • Posts: 103
  • Thanked: 30 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #124 on: June 23, 2021, 10:07:54 AM »
I would not change anything. The raiders are fine as they are, the ECM mechanics look like they are immensely fun, and it's a different threat compared to anything else in-game right now.
Making it easier to counter would only make it irrelevant.


It's an OPTIONAL spoiler race. You're not obligated to turn it on. You're not obligated to turn it on immediately.
You can just decide to wait a few years and THEN turn it on, if you prefer.
If I start conventional with reduced research, I don't turn on invaders until I have a couple of tech levels, for example.

And if you have it on from the start and you die? Losing is fun! Since when are we afraid of losing  ;D ;D ;D?

I don't think the game needs yet another extremely powerful spoiler. If I wanted to fight an NPR with a massive technological advantage I'd turn on the Invaders or Swarm. Raiders had seemed like they could be a different sort of challenge: not very strong but unpredictable and persistent. But it seems Steve has other ideas -- which is fine, it's his game. :)
 

Offline Bremen

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • B
  • Posts: 743
  • Thanked: 150 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #125 on: June 23, 2021, 12:26:23 PM »
Yeah. Though I've tried to express my opinion, and I do think the ECM change makes sense purely on a balance level, my purpose isn't to try to bully Steve into making the changes I want. I just hoped to provide some perspective and if he decides to go with something else that's fine.
 

Offline Aetreus

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • A
  • Posts: 4
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #126 on: June 23, 2021, 03:47:33 PM »
Maybe have them with a bit less ECM but use cloaking devices and engine thermal signature reduction technologies as well as ECM? That would considerably drop the ability of fleets to pursue them or engage them at long range with missiles while cutting their ability to duel warships up close.
 
The following users thanked this post: Gabrote42

Online nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2960
  • Thanked: 2222 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #127 on: June 23, 2021, 03:58:27 PM »
Thermal reduction is a must and I am shocked that it is not already installed on Raider ships after re-checking the Gothic campaign updates. However cloaking devices are very heavy unless using nearly endgame technology, very similar to jump drives in terms of tonnage requirements, so adding cloaks to the Raider ships would require either stripping them of combat ability or giving them very high techs. NPRs also are not very good at skirting sensor range like a player does, so I'm not sure they could actually use the cloaks effectively instead of charging into range of a RES-1 sensor anyways.
 

Offline Aetreus

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • A
  • Posts: 4
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #128 on: June 23, 2021, 05:46:28 PM »
Quote from: nuclearslurpee link=topic=12524. msg152921#msg152921 date=1624481907
Thermal reduction is a must and I am shocked that it is not already installed on Raider ships after re-checking the Gothic campaign updates.  However cloaking devices are very heavy unless using nearly endgame technology, very similar to jump drives in terms of tonnage requirements, so adding cloaks to the Raider ships would require either stripping them of combat ability or giving them very high techs.  NPRs also are not very good at skirting sensor range like a player does, so I'm not sure they could actually use the cloaks effectively instead of charging into range of a RES-1 sensor anyways.
ECM4 isn't a cheap technology itself, the 80k RP investment to get it is equivalent to that of an eff 6/80% cloak.  Taking up a sixth of the tonnage is a major impact but at the same time I think it'd be good to chop into a raider's tonnage budget if they're expected to out-tech their opponents in most cases.  They don't have missiles anyways so this would be a pretty pure downside in combat for them, the upside would be to make them require more specialized equipment to detect and engage outside of a beam fight.
 
The following users thanked this post: papent

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2822
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #129 on: June 23, 2021, 06:04:07 PM »
To be honest I don't think ECM should be a problem in and of itself as you just have to invest in ECM/ECCM on your own to lower it's impact.

The main issue I have with NPR beam combat is that they don't care about MSP and can fire indefinitely. The use of MSP is what makes a large low tech fleet have some possibility to survive an NPR beam fleet that have better range and speed.

I think that NPR should suffer the same problem with weapon failures as players so they will eventually not be able to fire anymore unless they go back to base. They don't need to follow normal maintenance rules just not have infinite ammunition.
 
The following users thanked this post: Droll, serger, Gabrote42, Sebmono, nuclearslurpee

Offline Borealis4x

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 717
  • Thanked: 141 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #130 on: June 24, 2021, 01:50:13 PM »
okay i don't think the spoilers are necessary so....

I'm also surprised to hear the raiders don't have any stealth. I'd personally split the tech points invested into ECM with stealth tech with more of an emphasis on stealth. That should be their number 1 technology out of the gate and even come at the expense of offensive weaponry; it'll teach players the importance of good sensor coverage.

Finding and responding to raiders should be the challenge, not necessarily fighting them.

EDIT: I also think there should be more emphasis on boarding and planetary invasion of vulnerable frontier worlds. They're slaving Pirates after all and I think we need more motivation to have proper planetary defenses that aren't just the cheapest infantry possible to suppress unrest.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2021, 12:28:43 AM by Garfunkel »
 
The following users thanked this post: Droll

Offline Droll

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • D
  • Posts: 1703
  • Thanked: 599 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #131 on: June 24, 2021, 01:54:26 PM »
Finding and responding to raiders should be the challenge, not necessarily fighting them.

I think this line summarizes best.

I don't think the ECM of the raiders is the problem here, its just the powerful weaponry given that they're supposed to be attacking lone escorts / hapless commercials. I definitely support the idea of adding more tonnage to the stealth side at the cost of weapons tonnage. Especially since these spoilers were IIRC made not as a combat challenge but more so as a logistics challenge.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2021, 03:03:04 PM by Droll »
 
The following users thanked this post: nuclearslurpee, ISN

Online nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2960
  • Thanked: 2222 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #132 on: June 24, 2021, 02:38:57 PM »
Guys let's please try to use spoiler tags to talk about the new spoilers, some folks do browse this thread for updates but want to keep the new spoilers a mystery...

Finding and responding to raiders should be the challenge, not necessarily fighting them.

I think this line summarizes best.

I don't think the ECM of the raiders is the problem here, its just the powerful weaponry given that they're supposed to be attacking lone escorts / hapless commercials. I definitely support the idea of adding more tonnage to the stealth side at the cost of weapons tonnage. Especially since these spoilers were IIRC made not as a combat challenge but more so as a logistics challenge.


I think this makes the most sense. Adding cloaking and dropping the weapons load to just 2-4x 15 cm railguns would work very well if the idea is to allow the raiders to be fought off by a respectable force, 15 cm railguns will still make very short work of any commercial or civilian vessel. With tonnage regained from reducing weapons and power cells, and perhaps reducing the BFC size, it's possible to fit a cloak with 8 efficiency, which is very high in terms of techs but very much in keeping with the flavor.
 
The following users thanked this post: Droll, LiquidGold2, ISN

Offline Garfunkel

  • Registered
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2781
  • Thanked: 1048 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #133 on: June 25, 2021, 12:30:28 AM »
okay i don't think the spoilers are necessary so....
They certainly are necessary. I want to know about changes in 1.14 but I do not want to be spoiled about the new spoiler race. I regret reading all about Rakshas before ever encountering them. I've fixed your post to put spoiler tags in place.
 
The following users thanked this post: LiquidGold2, skoormit, nuclearslurpee

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11649
  • Thanked: 20350 times
Re: v1.14.0 Changes Discussion Thread
« Reply #134 on: June 26, 2021, 05:16:51 AM »
To be honest I don't think ECM should be a problem in and of itself as you just have to invest in ECM/ECCM on your own to lower it's impact.

The main issue I have with NPR beam combat is that they don't care about MSP and can fire indefinitely. The use of MSP is what makes a large low tech fleet have some possibility to survive an NPR beam fleet that have better range and speed.

I think that NPR should suffer the same problem with weapon failures as players so they will eventually not be able to fire anymore unless they go back to base. They don't need to follow normal maintenance rules just not have infinite ammunition.

I've changed this for v1.14. NPRs now suffer weapon failure and consume MSP to fix it.