Dread Star isn't so dread

[bjg]

game_876 - I've sent 5(!) Dread Stars to clear a Marauder's base, and almost loose one. If I'd sent 3 - they probably wouldn't make it. Perhaps DS needs more SuperHeavy hardpoints (to put one into each - instead of three), and a number of Light ones (additionally) - to mount missile defense systems.
Speaking of missile defense - right now the Defense Turbolaser is the best one. Do you plan PD weapons in the higher tech tiers?

[sven]

Speaking of missile defense - right now the Defense Turbolaser is the best one. Do you plan PD weapons in the higher tech tiers?

There should be a pd fusion beam weapon --but it looks like it's misconfigured atm. Um, should be fixed in the next patch. (Thanks for pointing this out.)

Edit: Balancing a late-game PD weapon is also a bit interesting -- as I think it's often rate of fire that matters for PD effectiveness, as much as damage per shot. Particularly to keep up with RF Turbolasers, the fusion PDs probably need some kind of in-built RoF buff -- but I'm not sure quite what's appropriate. I may start with 3x, as see how that plays.

[bjg]

The Dread Star is much better now, thank you! Not necessary more powerful (2 SSCs total instead of 6), but better protected and more configurable.
Speaking of configurable - I'd like to try loading Assault Shuttles instead of fighters, but they don't multiply according to the Hangar size. A carrier's hangar fits 3 fighters or 1 shuttle. The DS's hangar fits 12 fighters (x4), but still 1 shuttle. I suppose a mobile planetoid can fit more than a couple of brigades.

[sven]

The DS's hangar fits 12 fighters (x4), but still 1 shuttle. I suppose a mobile planetoid can fit more than a couple of brigades.

I think the DS should actually be getting 3 brigades per assault shuttle system (6 max), though right now, there's no way to discover that unless you actually build one. I need to update the designer info screens to make this more clear.

Balancing here is a little tricky -- Fleet Carriers aren't really supposed to be used as troop transports, so I think maxing the possible number of brigades that you can carry on an off-spec CVA at 3 is reasonable enough. I think the Dread Star, on the other hand, does need some kind of boost to brigades per mount. Atm, I think the DS is the only hull in the game that warrants this though. Maybe when we get super dreadnoughts, they'll get 2x per, though even that I'm not certain of.

[bjg]

Yes, there are 6 brigades. Thanks for the tip.

[enpi]

What is the biggest ship class you want to introduce into Sis? DS? Or Super-DS

[sven]

What is the biggest ship class you want to introduce into Sis? DS? Or Super-DS

Dread Stars will be the biggest. The "super dreadnought" class will be bigger than any of the battleships or heavy carriers, but, still significantly smaller than a Dread Star

[enpi]

have you ever thought of developing a system where the player can determine name, size and functionality of a ship hull?

[SirDamnALot]

have you ever thought of developing a system where the player can determine name, size and functionality of a ship hull?

You mean like a hull designer? (define hardpoints, turrets, system slots, etc?)
I think it would be hard to balance. You would tend to make the "perfect" ship, with no drawbacks besides pricetag. And price slows you a bit down, but does not making it less über-awesome.
And with the optimal ship, you would have no need for ship roles. Only bigger is better, because of more awesome.
Like in orion, there is no real mechanical incentive to choose a smaller ship over a bigger one.
And while I like orion very much, that aspect is a bit colourless.

[enpi]

have you ever thought of developing a system where the player can determine name, size and functionality of a ship hull?

You mean like a hull designer? (define hardpoints, turrets, system slots, etc?)
I think it would be hard to balance. You would tend to make the "perfect" ship, with no drawbacks besides pricetag. And price slows you a bit down, but does not making it less über-awesome.
And with the optimal ship, you would have no need for ship roles. Only bigger is better, because of more awesome.
Like in orion, there is no real mechanical incentive to choose a smaller ship over a bigger one.
And while I like orion very much, that aspect is a bit colourless.

If a ship-size designer is cleverly thought out, balanced and programmed, everything is possible, even the avoidance of the pitfalls you mentioned.

[Arioch]

In our system, each hull is based on a specific art asset with a fixed size and a certain pre-arranged set of weapon mounts. This does not lend itself well to user-defined hulls.

[SirDamnALot]

In our system, each hull is based on a specific art asset with a fixed size and a certain pre-arranged set of weapon mounts. This does not lend itself well to user-defined hulls.

Even if you would ignore that and only spawn beams and missiles from the middle of the sprite, the gameplay implications are still severe.
Normally I am against constraints, but here I like the limitation of the predefined ship hulls per race. It forces a bit diversity in your fleet and gives more "flavor" to the race.
It probably is still a race for the biggest hull. (It would be cool to have an actual reason to let smaller craft fight alongside bigger, e.g. bigger ones have a *real* hard time hitting the small frys, even with PD weapons, or if you could stack smaller ships and let them a) handle as one ship and b) mitigate some damage. That would reduce clutter on the battleflied and gives smaller hulls some survivalbility and a reson to exists besides the big bathtubs of death )

[enpi]

In our system, each hull is based on a specific art asset with a fixed size and a certain pre-arranged set of weapon mounts. This does not lend itself well to user-defined hulls.

yep. the art. But I guess it would be possible to have some hull art designs unattached to a predefined ship size? Freedom and creativity is trump for many and if Sis allows to predefine some hull layouts and sizes by the player it would have, what we in the marketing business call, a "unique selling point" against any other competing 4x games. its no accident that xcom2 can sell its first DLC consisting only of creative art (eg. customization options for soldiers) for fat 5 bucks.

[Arioch]

It probably is still a race for the biggest hull.

I agree that we need to do more to give smaller hulls more utility. I think making them harder to hit might be part of the answer.

yep. the art. But I guess it would be possible to have some hull art designs unattached to a predefined ship size?

As you said, anything is possible, but that doesn't make it desirable. One of the most fundamental design decisions of SiS is that ships are built on race-specific hulls with visible articulated turrets, and are not generic containers for systems like in MOO2 with a static generic sprite. Customization options are good, but they need to fit within the design of the game.

[mharmless]

I agree that we need to do more to give smaller hulls more utility. I think making them harder to hit might be part of the answer.

Was playing some of the new StarDrive 2 DLC this week and one thing that struck me was how much more _useful_ small ships were compared to most games. Between getting a fairly large number of them maintenance free and how hard they are to hit, it ends up just being stupid to not have some. The game has this class of 'particle beam' weapons, all of which are basically guaranteed hit, lesser damage, and low range when compared to your other options. A big ship without any of them really struggles against small targets, but a big ship with those weapons will not have a great time against an enemy big ship with none of them, due to their inferiority. Really felt like the smaller ships dueled for space superiority and that winning that was super helpful when the capital slug fest started.