+- 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: Discovery 4.87 Balance Discussion (/showthread.php?tid=98573)
RE: Discovery 4.87 Balance Discussion - Haste - 06-05-2013
On the note of shotguns: Are there any plans for 2.00 Civilian guns that sync with 2.00 codenames? That's one of the things I always miss flying a civvie fighter
RE: Discovery 4.87 Balance Discussion - Yber - 06-05-2013
(06-05-2013, 10:52 AM)aerelm Wrote: Oh really? I must not be aware of the power drain on 4.87 Sammies/Trefoils then.
(06-05-2013, 10:13 AM)Yber Wrote: If it's shotgunable it means it got a similar hull to eagle's (about 9200 hitpoints).
4.87 Shotgunable, not 4.86 shotgunable.
In this case you've simply upgraded the greyhound to be the same as it was, addapted to .87. As someone who flies quite a few, it needs a buff.
Do I have to understand that the guardian, avenger and etc will also be shotgunable by a wraith aswell, then?
Hasteric:
http://i.imgur.com/VmvTENW.jpg
hf.
RE: Discovery 4.87 Balance Discussion - aerelm - 06-05-2013
(06-05-2013, 01:04 PM)Yber Wrote: you've simply upgraded the greyhound to be the same as it was
I'm afraid my 2 copies of FLStat running on 4.86 and 4.87 data strongly disagree with you.
(06-05-2013, 12:41 PM)Hasteric Wrote: Are there any plans for 2.00 Civilian guns that sync with 2.00 codenames?
No.
RE: Discovery 4.87 Balance Discussion - meliva - 06-05-2013
Could you please explain exactly what changes were made to Avenger and Guardian?
RE: Discovery 4.87 Balance Discussion - Blodo - 06-05-2013
Quote:Avenger, Liberty Very Heavy Fighter, roll stats switched with Guardian's.The Avenger was the heavier ship yet had faster roll acceleration than the Guardian which was the lighter ship. It was switched so that both now handle the way it was intended.
Technical change. Didn't make sense the way it was before.
RE: Discovery 4.87 Balance Discussion - Ursus - 06-05-2013
one of the design principles for this game has been that "more wing surface" is supposed to be "faster rate of turn". you see that in a lot of places, especially the Spatial.
although, from a purely technical perspective, that would only ever be true in atmospheric flight--wings work by creating high and low pressure areas, which has no meaning in the vacuum of space. ships with lots of wings and tails and fins, serve no purpose in space shooter except to use our brain's prejudice about it. spherical ships with thrusters everywhere would actually be far more effective at turning, but its not a shmexy design
there's probably still some value to having larger target having better evasion capabilities, but turn rate should not be the direct key
RE: Discovery 4.87 Balance Discussion - Nerva - 06-06-2013
Quote:Lynx, Gallic Very Heavy Fighter, now has a slightly lower hitpoint.I hope it was taken into account that all 4 of its Class 10 slots are located at the end of its wings, meaning it is almost impossible to hit another fighter with more than 4 guns (2 of them being Class 9).
Not a major change, the ship was neither large nor slow enough to deserve that much hull, and since the general line of balance for the ship is working fine, hull was altered instead of agility or size.
At the same time, its main opponent has 14k armour, the same size, a neat hole in the middle, way better gun placement and a small bit less agility.
The bomber (Cougar) definitely needs an increase of its mass, though. Currently it strafes like a fighter.
Quote:All other fighters have the slot shared with one of their high-end gun slots.Does this mean that almost every fighter will have asymmetric layout if I want to use a missile?
Is there going to be any change to the Caracal? It has the size of the VHF, does not have any armour worth noting, and turns like an Eagle. Maybe move two its guns close to the cockpit, there are some unused hardpoints there.
Also, Gallic civilian weapons (pulses and lasers) are generally bad compared to their Sirius civilian equivalents. Is this going to stay in 4.87?
RE: Discovery 4.87 Balance Discussion - aerelm - 06-07-2013
(06-06-2013, 08:10 PM)Corundum Wrote: it is almost impossible to hit another fighter with more than 4 guns (2 of them being Class 9).
It's not as bad as you're trying to make it seem like. Let's not forget Culverins and Musketoons.
(06-06-2013, 08:10 PM)Corundum Wrote: its main opponent has [...] the same size
Not really.
(06-06-2013, 08:10 PM)Corundum Wrote: The bomber (Cougar) definitely needs an increase of its mass, though. Currently it strafes like a fighter.
Yup, that's being taken care of.
(06-06-2013, 08:10 PM)Corundum Wrote: Does this mean that almost every fighter will have asymmetric layout if I want to use a missile?
Pretty much.
(06-06-2013, 08:10 PM)Corundum Wrote: Is there going to be any change to the Caracal?
The hardpoints have already been set the way you're suggesting, didn't seem like a major enough change to include in the log though.
(06-06-2013, 08:10 PM)Corundum Wrote: Also, Gallic civilian weapons (pulses and lasers) are generally bad compared to their Sirius civilian equivalents. Is this going to stay in 4.87?
This one's already fixed as well.
RE: Discovery 4.87 Balance Discussion - EisenSeele - 06-07-2013
>.> If I were to volunteer time to compile a list of symmetrical mounts where possible, could you change missile slots to be such that loadouts with missiles are symmetrical?
RE: Discovery 4.87 Balance Discussion - Swallow - 06-07-2013
That would be pretty hard, considering that ships has a model-based gun mount.