+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Discovery Mod Balance (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=31)
+---- Thread: Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs (/showthread.php?tid=13034)
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Akumabito - 10-14-2008
' Wrote:Point is that there is no point in answering your question since your question is based on a faulty observation that indies don't group...I repeat...indies group all the time...play open sp if you wanna fly alone all the time.
EDIT: and once again you fail to argue anything at all on the merits of this discussion...plz don't hijack this thread
You're not understanding the question, the question relates to finding escorts for a cap ship. People on the server group often, but that's different than being able to find escorts for a cap ship very often.
Yes, in Sig 13 I can play in a group most times I log on, friegter or BD, but when in bretonia in any various cap it is very difficult to find an escort with any reliability. That's just the facts.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Jinx - 10-14-2008
@Eternal: - no ... capships are not nerft at all in 4.85 - its a complete revision of the subject. - their weapons are different, not better, nor worse... different.
we tried to achieve a balance that would .... in theory allow 2 - 3 bombers to take down a lone battleship ... UNLESS the battleship specialized on fighter defense by its choice of weapons - which would make it fairly tough against bombers.. especially such a small amount. - but it would make it rather vulnerable against other capital ships that attack it with anti-cap weapons.
for that.... think of the infamous missile gunboat ( often accused for unfairness .. but the concept is a good one ) - highly specialized in anti-fighter... but utterly useless against other caps.
furthermore, we wanted to achieve something that encourages the team. - so a faction battleship, relying on the other faction members CAN actually specialize. - so it does make sense for a faction to deploy two of those battleships for example. - one that is highly specilaized on anti-cap... another that is specialized on anti-bomber / anti-gunboat. ...thats a luxory a lone battleship without faction backup cannot have... a lone battleship must rely on a well rounded loadout to answer to as many threats as possible. - so the idea is to weaken lone battleships compared to faction battleships by their free choice! ( a lone battleship can still go fully for anti-cap... and it will be terrible to meet such a ship when you re flying a cap. - but since its lonely, it will have no chance when attacked by bombers.
but all that doesn t mean they are weaker.... as a matter of fact, we buffed them up some. - but its not anymore the simple point and click, but you need to keep track MUCH more on what weapons to use against what target at what precise time of the battle.
all that is theory... and it works well on a closed beta enviroment with staged pvp fights... how it works on the server - no one knows. but be asured that capital ships are not nerft further more ( at least from my point of view ) - and i m flying a non-factionized lone battleship myself.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Monk - 10-14-2008
I agree...it is an issue when you form a group and realize everyone is flying a cap...but since PvP tends to trump RP no one is ever willing to to switch out to an escort ship..
So in that respect, you are correct. Perhaps if we change things though people would be willing to rally around a capship since playing defense is a fun aspect that we don't really have...since it is all attack and kill as fast as possible.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Akumabito - 10-14-2008
' Wrote:furthermore, we wanted to achieve something that encourages the team. - so a faction battleship, relying on the other faction members CAN actually specialize. - so it does make sense for a faction to deploy two of those battleships for example. - one that is highly specilaized on anti-cap... another that is specialized on anti-bomber / anti-gunboat. ...thats a luxory a lone battleship without faction backup cannot have... a lone battleship must rely on a well rounded loadout to answer to as many threats as possible. - so the idea is to weaken lone battleships compared to faction battleships by their free choice! ( a lone battleship can still go fully for anti-cap... and it will be terrible to meet such a ship when you re flying a cap. - but since its lonely, it will have no chance when attacked by bombers.
Either you have given caps an answer to bombers, or you haven't.
If you have then you will see a lot of indy anti-bomber cap ships around, more than ever. It's the only thing an indy can do to keep a chance of a fair fight from the normal 4 to 1 odds the factions give him.
That means factions and groups will respond with anti-cap cap ships to counter the anti fighter/bomber cap ships. More caps all around.
Doesn't that seem likely?
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Dab - 10-14-2008
This is not a thread for another of your 'independants are better' and faction bashes Akuma. Talk about the topic, or don't post here.
Mjolner and the other devs and I are speaking of this on the dev forums. Feel free to take my ideas and CHANGE them to ways you think may work better. In the end, we may find a solution that does more then my new ideas, or the balancer's current ideas.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Eternal - 10-14-2008
Ah , this is starting to look much better , after Jinx explained it further more. Yes , I would realy like to see your idea being put into the next mod. Because I liked it ever since you posted it. Yes I agree , such specilization would realy add a new flavor to the game and RP when you are in a Battleship. I'm almost thilled to see other battleships with diffrent weapon loads , because they are all the same at the moment.
I remember you suggested decreasing the amount of turrets on a Battleship. Does specialization will be more ... hardcore ...rather then random elements of it. Is that being introdused to the server aswell
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Akumabito - 10-14-2008
' Wrote:This is not a thread for another of your 'independants are better' and faction bashes Akuma. Talk about the topic, or don't post here.
I am talking about the topic. Please don't attack me for personal reasons and try to pass it off as something else, OK?
There are really only a couple directions to go with cap ships themselves, make them stronger against bombers, either by nerfing the SN or increasing the anti-small ship defense of the caps, making them weaker, or keeping them she same. The more complex you make the changes, the more chance of unexpected results you have.
I think if you make cap ships more versatile it will increase the number of caps. Not a bad in and of itself but it's undeniable that are a lot of cap haters on the forums, many of them faction players.
The other direction you could go is to eliminate the SN, and strip anti-fighter weapons from caps, making it difficult or impossible for a cap to kill a bomber/fighter and vica versa. That will reduce caps on the server. If that's done then something needs to be done to rebalance fighter combat, it takes way way way to long to resolve.
It's related issue to other rule and ID changes as well.
If you take the former track and make caps more versatile, then try to put more rule restrictions on who can fly them outside of official factions, then you are moving the server in the direction of faction only, making it more exclusive. While you may not like that point, and you may see it as anti faction, it is a legitimate point. Making cap ships stronger and then making them faction only is a slap in the face to indy players, it will create resentment.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Panzer - 10-14-2008
Eternal question is:
How to get powerful, big ships and not to allow too many people to use them
Powerful capships are doable - fo course thay are
Ship restrictions will be way harder... Massive amounts of admin work = big noes.
No... I wouldn't get the shield thingie done as it is. In fact - I'd do the opposite. Increase the Regen! And...hmmm
Oh, that's a funny idea
Remove the automatic shield restore and make a "second chance" possible only via batteries.
THEN - there'd have to only be enough fighters to keep up the dropping speed (The sheild's capacity would't play asa role as it does now) And once it's done - stuff goes downhill. Not "DOH! it recharged just when I fired my Snova BUEE!!!!"
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - mjolnir - 10-14-2008
' Wrote:The fact of the matter is the bigger ships would be seen abroad MUCH more often the the fighters. Just as many more people in the world have seen a U.S. aircraft carrier than one of our missle frigates or patrol boats up close.
Yes you are indeed right, they are seen abroad more... but NOT ALONE . Not without fighters to cover them from bombers and provide recon, not without bombers for long range strikes, not without destroyers (=GBs in Disco) to protect against submarines (=~ bombers in Disco), not without cruisers to protect against bombers or enemy surface ships (=GBs).
Yes I think they should be seen abroad with escorts in areas where they would be allowed - did you hear about Russia allowing US ships in its ports or territorial waters? No... then forget about BHG BS sitting above Manhattan. What other factions should have ships abroad? Pirates? yes, when they are mounting an attack, no problem. Then we have kind of ran out of factions don't you think?
(Note: Harvesters classify as pirates)
----------------------------------
@Dab
Quote:Also Mjolner, your right. I didn't test Beta. Because I think using the current balance and changing it in this way would work better. Just because you already have an idea, doesn't mean I can't think of something different.
I thought I already explained you over there (and JInx here) that 95% of the ideas you wrote about here are already in one way or another.
Idea on Capships, Bombers, and VHFs - Athenian - 10-14-2008
' Wrote:I am talking about the topic. Please don't attack me for personal reasons and try to pass it off as something else, OK?
There are really only a couple directions to go with cap ships themselves, make them stronger against bombers, either by nerfing the SN or increasing the anti-small ship defense of the caps, making them weaker, or keeping them she same. The more complex you make the changes, the more chance of unexpected results you have.
I think if you make cap ships more versatile it will increase the number of caps. Not a bad in and of itself but it's undeniable that are a lot of cap haters on the forums, many of them faction players.
The other direction you could go is to eliminate the SN, and strip anti-fighter weapons from caps, making it difficult or impossible for a cap to kill a bomber/fighter and vica versa. That will reduce caps on the server. If that's done then something needs to be done to rebalance fighter combat, it takes way way way to long to resolve.
It's related issue to other rule and ID changes as well.
If you take the former track and make caps more versatile, then try to put more rule restrictions on who can fly them outside of official factions, then you are moving the server in the direction of faction only, making it more exclusive. While you may not like that point, and you may see it as anti faction, it is a legitimate point. Making cap ships stronger and then making them faction only is a slap in the face to indy players, it will create resentment.
Create resentment? Create? Ha.
Making caps more versatile will not affect the plethora of oorp capship PvP idiots who roam the systems like Dirty Harry on crack. They will always have to find the ultimate ship for winning in combat.
This issue has nothing to do with factions at all. It has everything to do with a slight modification of the ships out there in favour of something that, from what Jinx says, is moving towards co-operative play. That's co-operative, not faction.
Exclusive? What's wrong with being a little exclusive? People get excluded from things all the time. Every society excludes. Otherwise it doesn't survive. This isn't Montgomery, Alabama in the late fifties.