+- 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: Removal of Cerberus Turrets or Replacement? (/showthread.php?tid=116767)
RE: Removal of Cerberus Turrets or Replacement? - SnakeLancerHaven - 06-18-2014
(06-18-2014, 05:10 PM)Lonely_Ghost Wrote:(06-18-2014, 04:54 PM)Snake Wrote: Also I don't think we need more Pulse cannons... In real it's the Hull which gets damaged very quick not the shield, so don't make shields more unusuable +_+ but I'd agree to EMP Missiles, 2 Different types of Missiles, why not? Or Something like the Shock Ray (Or Ray Cannon), but well fixed lol not slow turning like the first one, finaly it'd be able to turn quick and actually deal alot of dmg, more than Razor which would make it useful. Srsly the old Shock Rays were meh, slow turning realy useless maybe fix this.
That would be another step, to make weapons much less "multirole". Like again, we have cerbs as main antisheild and antihull. Why not to nerf SDPS for all non EMP weapons to 60-70%, but keep HDPS. Kinda...nearly same things happens with snubs, we have sheildbusters, and we have hullblasters, except full shotgun settup.
Oh, well, btw, would be nice, to add all BS + 2 Primary slots, and + 1 for Heavy
I find the idea good about reducing non EMP weapon SDPS (for those who don't know, Shield Damage Per Second) to 60 - 70%, however still doesn't change the fact that Cerberus alone as a Generic weapon is too powerful, if there would be like special y'know, Liberty Cerberus, Gallia Cerberus, Kusari Cerbs, this would be a whole different story but then I have to say there are the Primaries that already take over that part of Role so why the need for Cerberus? Let alone, the Nomads have own "Cerberus" type weapons too check http://discoverygc.com/wiki/Nomad_Turret_(Battleship_Heavy_Turret) <- Dealing 66k dmg. If the Factions would have own type of "Cerberus" Guns this would be another story (still in my honest opinion Cap Ships still die way too quick with such type of guns so I'm kinda against Cerberus). Also the idea of adding maybe 2 more Primary slot instead of the Cerbs, isn't bad either, so in fact Dreadnoughts would have 3 Heavies, while Battleships stick to 2 and Carriers to 1.
RE: Removal of Cerberus Turrets or Replacement? - An'shur - 06-18-2014
(06-18-2014, 05:20 PM)SkyNet Wrote: An indie dosn't cares much for RP or fair play, even less a bunch of them. For example: You can't give a boy a handgun and hope he will just play with it. Sooner or later he will hurt somebody.
If you don't like it to be an weak indie, join a faction. You won't regret it. It is good for the faction activity and good for the gameplay itself.
Just look at the K'hara. They got the infinite cloak. It is time to give all officials better stuff.
Interresting ideas, seriously, but:
1: Only people who really don't care about RP are newbs and total lolwuts, only part of indies, not all. But I agree it is not funny. All my characters are indies now and I am RPing to engage everytimes. BTW I still hope someone will response to my RP comm
2: K'Hara, good to discuss. I have argument to keep them OP: They are aliens with 2 000 000 years long history in space. I want to join them soon
RE: Removal of Cerberus Turrets or Replacement? - Lonely_Ghost - 06-18-2014
But Snake, if there would be "faction" wersion of Cerberuses, it won't solve problem that Cerbs are too OP weapon too. There going to be something like LSC forward cannon projectives from LNS Drds, or something like that, same for others.
Im talking about downgrading it. Making Cerberus as Main anti battleship weapon, but not "heavy". For example, Liberty BS Primaru turret would have greater range, greater projective speed, and refire, but less DPS, for hitting cruisers.
Liberty Cerberus, for example, again LSC FC effect, would be nice shotgun like weapon, with greater DPS, but less refire, range and project speed, for a BS scuffle. Both weapons should use nearly same amount of energy, and has 9 class.
RE: Removal of Cerberus Turrets or Replacement? - Trogdor - 06-18-2014
(06-18-2014, 04:54 PM)Snake Wrote:(06-18-2014, 03:31 AM)Trogdor Wrote: I would rather see the other cap weapons made to be more useful first. Then we can talk about what to do with Cerbs.
Eisen is right. Battleship is already weak, without talking about nerfing its one strong point.
If you've read closely it would remove Cruiser Cerbs too, how does this make the Battleships weak? It'd be for once Balanced.
Cruiser would still beat BS is because of Cruiser mortars and missiles, which have very long range. And while the BS weapons also have long range, the Cruiser can get out of the way or CM to avoid being hit by the BS's weapons. The BS is too big and too slow to avoid Cruiser mortars, so it loses.
All removing Cerbs would do is make it harder for BS to kill other BS and bases, which is the only thing BS is good at right now.
RE: Removal of Cerberus Turrets or Replacement? - Cashew - 06-18-2014
Just add more variety to a loadout that caps can have, then people will choose different turrets.
RE: Removal of Cerberus Turrets or Replacement? - Highland Laddie - 06-18-2014
(06-18-2014, 04:54 PM)Snake Wrote:(06-18-2014, 01:04 PM)Highland Laddie Wrote: My thoughts (or agreements with others' ideas):
1. Make Cerb RANGE lower to compensate for its hitting power
2. Make Cerb use more energy
3. Increase range of Primaries/Secondaries to greater than Cruiser Range
4. Double the BS missile max loadout
THe problem is, it doesn't change the fact that people can insta you by uncloaking, he can just sit at your "back-yard" and after that insta kill you with those Cerbs. With simple Primaries you'd still have a chance to escape but be like horribly damaged, still it would give you this option, but with the Cerbs you have none absolute death. <- No need to nerf Cloaks just an opinion about the Cerbs, if there would be no Cerbs there is no need to nerf the Cloaks imho. Also I don't think we need more Pulse cannons... In real it's the Hull which gets damaged very quick not the shield, so don't make shields more unusuable +_+ but I'd agree to EMP Missiles, 2 Different types of Missiles, why not? Or Something like the Shock Ray (Or Ray Cannon), but well fixed lol not slow turning like the first one, finaly it'd be able to turn quick and actually deal alot of dmg, more than Razor which would make it useful. Srsly the old Shock Rays were meh, slow turning realy useless maybe fix this.
Well, there are already EMP torpedoes for bombers and Pulse weapons for EVERY ship class, so I don't think it would do good to ALSO make an EMP missle for BSs (this also decreases the necessity for fleet diversity, which I am all in favor of). BSs should not be meant to go everywhere and stomp everything alone and without support. I would rather the player has to choose between having more Hull guns or Shield busters...as that ALSO affects the balance of the ship.
As for the insta-cloak cerb raping from the rear, that's a legit tactic. Let's say he does the same with a Mortar or Battle Razor? Same thing...still gonna eat you up. The trade off is that the other ship will also have no shields after de-cloaking...and will hopefully be a tempting target to whomever is supporting your BS while you get pummeled.
Anyways...for both your concerns, I would propose the following additional adjustments:
1. Increase BS shield hp by another 40%.
2. decrease Cerb hull damage slightly (maybe 10%)
3. make BS cloaks take up more cargo space (so that cloaking BSes cannot use more than CAU4 armor
RE: Removal of Cerberus Turrets or Replacement? - SnakeLancerHaven - 06-18-2014
(06-18-2014, 05:50 PM)Lonely_Ghost Wrote: But Snake, if there would be "faction" wersion of Cerberuses, it won't solve problem that Cerbs are too OP weapon too. There going to be something like LSC forward cannon projectives from LNS Drds, or something like that, same for others.
Im talking about downgrading it. Making Cerberus as Main anti battleship weapon, but not "heavy". For example, Liberty BS Primaru turret would have greater range, greater projective speed, and refire, but less DPS, for hitting cruisers.
Liberty Cerberus, for example, again LSC FC effect, would be nice shotgun like weapon, with greater DPS, but less refire, range and project speed, for a BS scuffle. Both weapons should use nearly same amount of energy, and has 9 class.
I know, that's why I said I'm actually against it, so yeah the removal or replacement would be only choice. But your Shotgun idea isn't bad either, something like a Second Battle Razor but with faster refire, something unique.
(06-18-2014, 06:40 PM)Trogdor Wrote:(06-18-2014, 04:54 PM)Snake Wrote:(06-18-2014, 03:31 AM)Trogdor Wrote: I would rather see the other cap weapons made to be more useful first. Then we can talk about what to do with Cerbs.
Eisen is right. Battleship is already weak, without talking about nerfing its one strong point.
If you've read closely it would remove Cruiser Cerbs too, how does this make the Battleships weak? It'd be for once Balanced.
Cruiser would still beat BS is because of Cruiser mortars and missiles, which have very long range. And while the BS weapons also have long range, the Cruiser can get out of the way or CM to avoid being hit by the BS's weapons. The BS is too big and too slow to avoid Cruiser mortars, so it loses.
All removing Cerbs would do is make it harder for BS to kill other BS and bases, which is the only thing BS is good at right now.
Uhm... No a Single Cruiser with a single Mortar can't take out a BS it takes way too much energy aswell as Missiles so no you'd need 2 Cruisers in order to destroy a BS OR you'd need realy skill to constantly fire at BS and use the right time.
Quote:1. Increase BS shield hp by another 40%.
2. decrease Cerb hull damage slightly (maybe 10%)
3. make BS cloaks take up more cargo space (so that cloaking BSes cannot use more than CAU4 armor
The 3rd part is not necessary, also I was referring to your "lower range" thing, because lowering range wont do anything as the ship will decloak behind you. Also no it isn't the same, if you decloak and shoot a mortar that other guy still has his Shields up it's hard to take it down with Primes only meanwhile the uncloaked BS is shieldless and leave it defensless, the attacked target would shoot a Heavy Mortar back, BAM you have balance, he wont be able to insta kill you as you prolly would kill him too.
RE: Removal of Cerberus Turrets or Replacement? - Trogdor - 06-18-2014
Quote:Uhm... No a Single Cruiser with a single Mortar can't take out a BS it takes way too much energy aswell as Missiles so no you'd need 2 Cruisers in order to destroy a BS OR you'd need realy skill to constantly fire at BS and use the right time.
Depends a lot on the Cruiser but, let's talk worst case scenario, which means you're a light Cruiser with 95,000 energy regen/sec. And we're talking about Cruiser vs. BS, so let's ignore core capacity and only focus on energy regen.
That means you can fire the light mortar every ~10 seconds. Therefore, 75,000 shield damage / 10 seconds = 7500 shield dps.
BS shield regenerates at 4800 hp/sec.
Therefore, even in the worst case scenario, and even if the Cruiser misses some shots, the Cruiser will eventually win. Heavier Cruisers, and especially Battlecruisers, will win more easily. Assuming the Cruiser has CMs, the BS cannot reliably hit it with anything, and the BS can't run because the Cruiser has CD.
Removing Cerbs from BS/Cruiser will do nothing to alter this. This above scenario is what really needs to be fixed in order to see more variety in BS loadouts, which seems to be the point of this thread.
RE: Removal of Cerberus Turrets or Replacement? - Yber - 06-18-2014
How about solid projectiles that ignore the shield? Something not -too- quick so that it doesn't slaughter gunboats and snubs at 1,5k, with a refire similar to the current primaries if not the same.
You wouldn't be able to cloak-kill stuff, 'cause to do that you'd need to be hitting with hull with "primaries and cerberus" at the same time (unless there's a very low armor equipped). It also promotes the teamwork (eg A dries B's shield, C uncloaks and kills B).
I don't know if such a thing can be implemented though.
Yes. I've been playing Star Wars.
RE: Removal of Cerberus Turrets or Replacement? - SnakeLancerHaven - 06-18-2014
(06-18-2014, 08:57 PM)Trogdor Wrote:Quote:Uhm... No a Single Cruiser with a single Mortar can't take out a BS it takes way too much energy aswell as Missiles so no you'd need 2 Cruisers in order to destroy a BS OR you'd need realy skill to constantly fire at BS and use the right time.
Depends a lot on the Cruiser but, let's talk worst case scenario, which means you're a light Cruiser with 95,000 energy regen/sec. And we're talking about Cruiser vs. BS, so let's ignore core capacity and only focus on energy regen.
That means you can fire the light mortar every ~10 seconds. Therefore, 75,000 shield damage / 10 seconds = 7500 shield dps.
BS shield regenerates at 4800 hp/sec.
Therefore, even in the worst case scenario, and even if the Cruiser misses some shots, the Cruiser will eventually win. Heavier Cruisers, and especially Battlecruisers, will win more easily. Assuming the Cruiser has CMs, the BS cannot reliably hit it with anything, and the BS can't run because the Cruiser has CD.
Removing Cerbs from BS/Cruiser will do nothing to alter this. This above scenario is what really needs to be fixed in order to see more variety in BS loadouts, which seems to be the point of this thread.
Uhm no dude, when you shoot a Mortar almost 60% - 70% of your energy goes down you can't constantly shoot Mortars, the BS has enough time to take you down before you can regen so much, you can't take down a BS with a Light Mortar so quick bro, it takes realy long as the BS Shield is regening by then.