Before, the carrier's fighters/bombers were taken out with ease, perhaps way too easily. Now, a full load out of the Gremak light cruiser (1x pd mass driver x4 Mass drivers with long range and Accuracy option) -may- take out 3-5 small craft in a turn. I think I need three light cruisers just to handle the bombers and interceptors from one carrier.
Is this correct?
Carriers possible balance issues
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
Seems like carriers are becoming useful. 
Are they expensive enough?
Are they expensive enough?
-
Captainspire
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 8:30 pm
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
It may also be because I'm playing that nightmare mode they just made.
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
Make a carrier yourself and test it, would be the best response. See what the opponent uses to counter it.
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
Difficulty doesn't affect combat odds, so you may be in a situation where he has some key techs that you don't.
We haven't yet done the fighter/carrier revamps which will change things significantly, so I'm not too worried about the current balance of fighters and carriers (and missiles) because I know it's bad.
We haven't yet done the fighter/carrier revamps which will change things significantly, so I'm not too worried about the current balance of fighters and carriers (and missiles) because I know it's bad.
-
Captainspire
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 8:30 pm
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
bjg wrote:Seems like carriers are becoming useful.
Are they expensive enough?
Yea but it's making all other ships useless and I mean useless.
http://i.imgur.com/LybMq3u.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/xi1Fpsw.jpg
Uploaded "game_1569" for fleet in action
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
Seems appropriate.
Point Defense should not be effective against bombers (they are armored), they should be effective against fighters and missiles
Fighters should be effective against bombers, that is their main purpose - have you tested these against the bombers?
Additionally: It should not be a problem if the bombers are not all destroyed. They are like any other weapon and are ok if they deliver a punch. Otherwise PD would just make all missiles, bombers and fighters useless. There are still shields and armor to withstand a bomber attack, so it is not like the ship is automatically doomed if the bombers get through. They also get recharge time for their shields + repair time until the next bomber run (which will be reduced due to the last attack)
Is there anything hiding behind those carriers?
I would be more worried about the AI concentrating too much on one single weapon type which can bee easily countered (via fighters in this case)
Point Defense should not be effective against bombers (they are armored), they should be effective against fighters and missiles
Fighters should be effective against bombers, that is their main purpose - have you tested these against the bombers?
Additionally: It should not be a problem if the bombers are not all destroyed. They are like any other weapon and are ok if they deliver a punch. Otherwise PD would just make all missiles, bombers and fighters useless. There are still shields and armor to withstand a bomber attack, so it is not like the ship is automatically doomed if the bombers get through. They also get recharge time for their shields + repair time until the next bomber run (which will be reduced due to the last attack)
Is there anything hiding behind those carriers?
I would be more worried about the AI concentrating too much on one single weapon type which can bee easily countered (via fighters in this case)
Last edited by zolobolo on Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Captainspire
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 8:30 pm
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
16 point defense guns only took out one bomber?
On another turn, 8 standard Coilguns only took out 2 or 3 bombers and sometimes none. With a 140% hit rate that is really frightening.
I'm also pretty sure that the description of the PD guns was designed to take out missiles and "smaller crafts"
Nothing is behind these carriers as the bottom right map shows 4 large ships the four carriers. The AI built Carriers and constantly attacked me with 4-6 carriers at once. There was no counter for them and yea, my shields and armor did not withstand a single round of the bomber/fighter attack and the ship (cruiser) was destroyed that very turn. In 4 turns my fleet was destroyed and that was that. Under my best configuration I managed to take out one carrier before I lost.
Both the AI and I had 2nd generation shields and Durianium armor.
Again, the fact this is playing in that new nightmare game mode, I guess places the AI in a massive advantage building wise and resource wise as they had primaries and carriers.
No, I have not tried countering with missiles or fighters as in this scenario and I cannot build even one carrier in time to counter their 4-6 they toss at me.
What I'm going to do is go back to the last possible saved game and see if I can readjust my tech stratagem.
On another turn, 8 standard Coilguns only took out 2 or 3 bombers and sometimes none. With a 140% hit rate that is really frightening.
I'm also pretty sure that the description of the PD guns was designed to take out missiles and "smaller crafts"
Nothing is behind these carriers as the bottom right map shows 4 large ships the four carriers. The AI built Carriers and constantly attacked me with 4-6 carriers at once. There was no counter for them and yea, my shields and armor did not withstand a single round of the bomber/fighter attack and the ship (cruiser) was destroyed that very turn. In 4 turns my fleet was destroyed and that was that. Under my best configuration I managed to take out one carrier before I lost.
Both the AI and I had 2nd generation shields and Durianium armor.
Again, the fact this is playing in that new nightmare game mode, I guess places the AI in a massive advantage building wise and resource wise as they had primaries and carriers.
No, I have not tried countering with missiles or fighters as in this scenario and I cannot build even one carrier in time to counter their 4-6 they toss at me.
What I'm going to do is go back to the last possible saved game and see if I can readjust my tech stratagem.
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
Interesting... I can only play the Steam version, where the AI is still pretty weak compared to this. Bombers also do not pose any real threat there
In the DEV change log following can be seen: "Adjustments to missile damage" - might this be the reason for sudden increase of bomber efficiency?
Otherwise the AI is either:
1. Much more advanced technological and the bombers inherit advanced missile tech
2. The difficulty does in fact change the attack values
PD description has not yet been updated, but the small crafts concept will be overworked - think that this has been mentioned in a couple of threads in the forum. If PD will be efficient against bombers, is thus probably not decided yet I guess, but hope it will not, see: http://stars-in-shadow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=384
Have to test these new bombers for myself, but the tactical scenario does not seem inherently wrong. Bombers should be packing a huge punch as they are undefended weapons, that can be shot down, and the carrier does not add much to the battle itself. They need to be worth the investment and should be able to take out even large ships if not countered.
The problem in my opinion in this scenario lies in the AI behaviour to construct the fleet like this.
Probably everyone agrees that AI should not be building a single type of ship, especially when they have a ton of resources...
In the DEV change log following can be seen: "Adjustments to missile damage" - might this be the reason for sudden increase of bomber efficiency?
Otherwise the AI is either:
1. Much more advanced technological and the bombers inherit advanced missile tech
2. The difficulty does in fact change the attack values
PD description has not yet been updated, but the small crafts concept will be overworked - think that this has been mentioned in a couple of threads in the forum. If PD will be efficient against bombers, is thus probably not decided yet I guess, but hope it will not, see: http://stars-in-shadow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=384
Have to test these new bombers for myself, but the tactical scenario does not seem inherently wrong. Bombers should be packing a huge punch as they are undefended weapons, that can be shot down, and the carrier does not add much to the battle itself. They need to be worth the investment and should be able to take out even large ships if not countered.
The problem in my opinion in this scenario lies in the AI behaviour to construct the fleet like this.
Probably everyone agrees that AI should not be building a single type of ship, especially when they have a ton of resources...
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
I played through this battle in game_1569, and I don't see anything overpowered about the carriers. The defending fleet had relatively few point defense weapons; I lost the battle but was still able to destroy almost all the enemy bombers and 2 of the carriers. Considering that the attacking 4 heavy carriers cost significantly more than defending 2 heavy cruisers and 4 light cruisers, and the attacker has higher tech than the defender, the outcome shouldn't be surprising.
Fighters and bombers scale with available technology; the Phidi bombers are armed with Fusion Torpedoes that do 50 damage per hit.
Difficulty level gives the AI tech and production discounts and some starting bonuses, but it doesn't affect weapon damage or combat chances. In this battle the Phidi have significantly out-teched the player.
Fighters and bombers scale with available technology; the Phidi bombers are armed with Fusion Torpedoes that do 50 damage per hit.
Difficulty level gives the AI tech and production discounts and some starting bonuses, but it doesn't affect weapon damage or combat chances. In this battle the Phidi have significantly out-teched the player.
-
TheDeadlyShoe
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 9:24 pm
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
Wait, so bombers scale with missile warhead tech...?
That seems a little weird given that they are the two different kinds of ordnance.
EDIT:
Okay, thought about my initial reaction a little. If bombers do the damage of (highest tech missile weapon), they're indistinguishable from reuseable missiles. Not necessarily a problem, but consider that they will always struggle to be anything but second rate: Missile weapons keep firing at maximum density until ammo is exhausted. Bomber salvo density will drop precipitously as losses are taken. Even under the Steam-current ammo paradigm of 3 shots without extra munitions, bombers have to succeed on making 3 attack runs to be 'on par' with a current warhead. Good luck! In my experience, half tend to get shot down on the first attack run, and the second attack run is purely a desperation maneuver; somewhat paradoxically, the best doctrine for using fighters is melee range, so you only take PD fire. That also doesn't consider that bombers take several turns to make a long range attack; a missile ship can have fired multiple salvos in that time.
Another aspect is that for bombers you have to research both missile AND carrier technology, And not just missile tech but torpedo tech which is the 'missile strategy' tech. When you first research bombers they are probably going to be 8 damage a shot (in practice totally useless).
To be fair, torpedo mounts arnt that common, and you are generally getting more torpedo 'shots' through bombers than you can otherwise.
human battleship, 2 torpedos, 8 missiles, built in munitions (4 bomber equiv/salvo, 5 salvo, 20 'bomber equivalent')
human carrier (2x), 8 bombers. Bombers have to make 20 successful attacks in order to reach parity. If half get shot down on the first attack, then you only get 12. If 2 get shot down per attack...*after* attacking, you get exactly 20, for parity, after 4 attack waves. Eurgh.
And all this is just to get the same thing as torpedos, :<
That seems a little weird given that they are the two different kinds of ordnance.
EDIT:
Okay, thought about my initial reaction a little. If bombers do the damage of (highest tech missile weapon), they're indistinguishable from reuseable missiles. Not necessarily a problem, but consider that they will always struggle to be anything but second rate: Missile weapons keep firing at maximum density until ammo is exhausted. Bomber salvo density will drop precipitously as losses are taken. Even under the Steam-current ammo paradigm of 3 shots without extra munitions, bombers have to succeed on making 3 attack runs to be 'on par' with a current warhead. Good luck! In my experience, half tend to get shot down on the first attack run, and the second attack run is purely a desperation maneuver; somewhat paradoxically, the best doctrine for using fighters is melee range, so you only take PD fire. That also doesn't consider that bombers take several turns to make a long range attack; a missile ship can have fired multiple salvos in that time.
Another aspect is that for bombers you have to research both missile AND carrier technology, And not just missile tech but torpedo tech which is the 'missile strategy' tech. When you first research bombers they are probably going to be 8 damage a shot (in practice totally useless).
To be fair, torpedo mounts arnt that common, and you are generally getting more torpedo 'shots' through bombers than you can otherwise.
human battleship, 2 torpedos, 8 missiles, built in munitions (4 bomber equiv/salvo, 5 salvo, 20 'bomber equivalent')
human carrier (2x), 8 bombers. Bombers have to make 20 successful attacks in order to reach parity. If half get shot down on the first attack, then you only get 12. If 2 get shot down per attack...*after* attacking, you get exactly 20, for parity, after 4 attack waves. Eurgh.
And all this is just to get the same thing as torpedos, :<
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
Point defense will be less effective against bombers than missiles; a point defense "hit" on a bomber will have a chance to make the bomber miss its attack and waste the ordnance. This should result in a fairly similar amount of damage per bombing run, but more bombers will survive to return to the carrier and rearm for another run. The optimal defense against bombers will be interceptors. The number of small craft in each squadron needs to be increased, and missiles also need changes.
Once the changes to the mechanics are in there will still be more tweaks to balance needed to get it right, but I think we can get there. But trying to compare the numbers now before these changes go in is kind of a waste of effort.
Once the changes to the mechanics are in there will still be more tweaks to balance needed to get it right, but I think we can get there. But trying to compare the numbers now before these changes go in is kind of a waste of effort.
-
Captainspire
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 8:30 pm
Re: Carriers possible balance issues
Arioch wrote:Point defense will be less effective against bombers than missiles; a point defense "hit" on a bomber will have a chance to make the bomber miss its attack and waste the ordnance. This should result in a fairly similar amount of damage per bombing run, but more bombers will survive to return to the carrier and rearm for another run. The optimal defense against bombers will be interceptors. The number of small craft in each squadron needs to be increased, and missiles also need changes.
Once the changes to the mechanics are in there will still be more tweaks to balance needed to get it right, but I think we can get there. But trying to compare the numbers now before these changes go in is kind of a waste of effort.
Well, I gota rethink this.
I've always employed a, hold position and fire at things that come my way, but that doesn't work well against carriers. So, I honestly took time to rethink my strategy. And rethink I did. It took about 3-4 Cruisers with rail guns to take out one carrier. I noticed that once the carrier was destroyed the fighters and bombers had no were to return to after their first assault and were destroyed themselves. Upgrading the defense lasers with rapid fire, Armor pierce, and Accuracy made a huge difference over pd coil guns. Having all my remaining weapons on the light cruisers and cruisers, focus on the bombers and fighters did the trick.
With 5 cruisers and 4 light cruisers, I was able to fight off those same 5 carriers.