Free Allegiance Forums

how did we got so offtopic?


I am just a stupid newb... but after playing a while, reading the f1 help, and memorizing 1/2 the wiki... I have noticed something.

a considerable portion of the ships available, and tech avalible is in the shipyard.

That hints to me that the shipyard was not supposed to be something to be avoided, it was supposed to be usefull, and used, but not to be completely relied opon.

Now, even when sy is on, it is very rarely used. (prolly because, for most factions, you have to sink 10000 for a regular base+20000 for the sy +5000 for light class before you can even use it)

Often, I get told, that sy is turned off because it is too OP in small games, and captial ships pop in large games.

So far, on this thread, I have seen no such arguement.

Actually, I have seen about nill arguments so far.

so... why exactly do you want to turn ship yards off?

But before we answer that, let us please answer these questions first:

What role are capital ships currently used for?
How is that good/bad?

and, what role SHOULD the capital ships be filling?

The arguments have been reheated a number of times, so I won't bore you with them. The community has been working on SY for some time to try and make it more used, and everyone's heard the various arguments several times so they aren't repeating them in this thread.

For me - Cap ships are really not as much fun, you basically end up with more than half your team sitting in a turret.
They are overpowered in Small games (The only way to counter shipyard in games of <10 or so is by buying a shipyard of your own) I don't think any argues they are balanced there.


Here's some further reading on the arguments that have been going back and forth, showing how difficult it has been to balance. The core team tried to make it used more in Community Core version 7, then nerfed it back a bit in later releases. They were looking for a sweet spot where it's an alternative techpath. But it is a very difficult task.

Anyone - read back on the debates that went around the current implementation of SY if you are interested.
1
2
3

Capships just make boring games. If you look at the ship details in loadout, you see what they were used for. For example corvettes are an escort ship. Capships are fun for newbs because they pack some power and every newb wants to hop in a turret because (like me) that's the only way they can get kills.

Capship games (As I see it) are:
SY Team - Ok, we got X minutes until we get something that's an end all
Not SY Team - Ok, we got X minutes until they get something that's an end all. Get rid of that SY

If both teams are SY - Ok, we gotta take out their Capships with our Capships before they get a Capship that'll end it. While we do that, let's get a Capship that'll end it as a backup.

It's pretty much exp vs exp only a lot longer, and a lot less fun.

Also, Caphips don't fall under the teamwork aspect of this game as well as it would be liked. It takes a team of 6-7 figs to take down 1 ship with 3 people in it that can blow down a base, and 2 are turrets. (And this is without a nan)

Shipyard is/should be an expensive way to end the game. Particularly useful if the other team is turtling with mini3 hvy ints and the SY team has most of the map but can't break the turtle with small ships.

Basically a "throw enough money at the problem to solve it" type deal.

notjarvis wrote:QUOTE (notjarvis @ Aug 1 2010, 06:21 PM) They were looking for a sweet spot where it's an alternative techpath.

I'm pretty sure this wasn't the idea behind our changes. It was more "lets make caps not explode instantly to figs so they aren't a complete waste of their cost".

Xeretov wrote:QUOTE (Xeretov @ Aug 2 2010, 01:41 AM) Basically a "throw enough money at the problem to solve it" type deal.

That sums it up nicely.

I suppose it's about time to take another good look at SY.

Personally I think it's the AoE (area effect) + lead indicator guns that suck the fun out of things in SY games. I'm sure there are things that can be done.

I read the first few pages of each of those threads... alot of it is about radical ideas... and all of it about cc07, which is close to today, but things have changed, and people have been able to get a better feel for the game since then, and more well developed ideas (in the most recent thread you linked, people were still like, "well, i havent played cc07 yet, but...")

looking at elzam and xertov... we perhaps see the problem? IF sy are supposed to be an end-all... then we have the issue elzam brought up: "we have x min till an end-all"

now, I cant tell from the wiki how much dis3 or mini3 gus do... but dis1 does 52.5 dps vs cap ships. multiply that by 3 to get what an advanced fighter would do. compare that to a interceptor... with 50*.25= 12.5 dps vs very heavy capial ships.

so... exp does 37.5 dps (int with 3 minis) and sup does 157.5 dps (fig with dis)... it takes more than 4 ints to do the same damage as a fig? I see why sy is labled anti-exp and sup is anti-sy. Intresting. Its also intresting that nanite1 repairs 45 dps on a capital ship.... which means for every advanced fighter one was faced with, one would need 3 scouts to nan... that might be our issue with "in big games cap ships pop"... cause if you have 20 figs attacking your capital ship... (which would kill the cap ship in ~4 seconds before research) you would need 60 scouts naning... something that prolly just is not going to happen.

the issue with small games, is prolly that massive shield regen... in an exp vs sy game... that shield regen would cancel out the damage of 2 and 1/2 heavy interceptors... you would need (num of intercepters-2.5)*.833 nans to keep your cap ships invinsible... in a game of 5v5... lets say, 0 nans (everyone is in the cap ship)... vs 5 ints... the ints dont stand a chance. now... figs have a much better chance at doing rather well... killing that battle ship in 17-18 seconds.

Now, mind you... if those 5 intercepters, all got in bombers... they could go spread out, and rape the enemy bases much faster than that single battleship could kill thier stuff.... (and those 5 bombers would be MUCH cheaper than that capital ship... and thats before one factors in research costs... at which point there us no contest)... Basicly: In such a game of attrition... the non-capital ship team should be able to easily win every time.

(yes, I did just suggust that the way to beat capital ships in this game, is the same way in every other space-based rts: BOMBER SPAM!)

pbhead wrote:QUOTE (pbhead @ Aug 2 2010, 11:27 PM) the issue with small games, is prolly that massive shield regen... in an exp vs sy game... that shield regen would cancel out the damage of 2 and 1/2 heavy interceptors... you would need (num of intercepters-2.5)*.833 nans to keep your cap ships invinsible... in a game of 5v5... lets say, 0 nans (everyone is in the cap ship)... vs 5 ints... the ints dont stand a chance. now... figs have a much better chance at doing rather well... killing that battle ship in 17-18 seconds.

As long as you have turrets, it will be longer than 17-18 seconds. The figs will die to the turrets at the same time as they deal out damage.

QUOTE Now, mind you... if those 5 intercepters, all got in bombers... they could go spread out, and rape the enemy bases much faster than that single battleship could kill thier stuff.... (and those 5 bombers would be MUCH cheaper than that capital ship... and thats before one factors in research costs... at which point there us no contest)... Basicly: In such a game of attrition... the non-capital ship team should be able to easily win every time.

(yes, I did just suggust that the way to beat capital ships in this game, is the same way in every other space-based rts: BOMBER SPAM!)[/quote]

Meh. In reality the Caps need to defend one single sector, maybe 2 to be safe. In such situations Bomber spam doesn't really work, as they die in seconds to capship turrets

And if the bombers aren't synchronised, the Caps can rip around killing them pretty easily (in fact the Commander could probably do it on his own if he has a fighter).


Can I point you towards TEK. A handy tool for doing those calculations you were doing?


@Xer - Apologies for getting that wrong. I remember the "Alternative techpath" being one of the poll options, and for some reason I thought CC went for that. My mistake

notjarvis wrote:QUOTE (notjarvis @ Aug 2 2010, 03:47 PM) Can I point you towards TEK. A handy tool for doing those calculations you were doing?

Also ... if you haven't already done so pbhead ... be sure to sign up for Allegiance Flight School. It's a program we put together for new players to introduce them to the steep learning curve of the game, there are often training events and also a private forum you can ask any Allegiance question in without fear of being made fun of.

pbhead wrote:QUOTE (pbhead @ Aug 2 2010, 03:27 PM) (yes, I did just suggust that the way to beat capital ships in this game, is the same way in every other space-based rts: BOMBER SPAM!)

Take AFS, take Cadet2, and stop talking about things you have no clue about.

notjarvis wrote:QUOTE (notjarvis @ Aug 2 2010, 06:47 PM) I remember the "Alternative techpath" being one of the poll options, and for some reason I thought CC went for that. My mistake

It got suggested many times during discussion so I can understand why.

Adding a payday bonus to the drydock was pretty close to this as well, though IIRC the reasoning behind that was to offset the per-ship cost of caps a bit. Turned out to be too much on top of other changes.