+- 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)
+--- Thread: Who is in charge of balancing caps? (/showthread.php?tid=115543)
RE: Who is in charge of balancing caps? - Highland Laddie - 06-02-2014
Quote:They are meant for fighting other battleships. Period.
Quote:They can be used for supporting others with regens or docking rights or to provide a "safe area" where you can run to because the enemy chasing you won't dare to come that close to a BS.
Okay...that's actually two uses. And don't forget base sieges as well.
Quote:Everything else pretty much wrecks them.
Let's get on the same page first, because this is a ridiculous statement. Non-bomber snubs, freighters, and all transports certainly don't wreck them at all, so let's keep the emotionally-charged wording to a minimum and stick with actual facts.
So the problem as you see is they are too easily beaten (I assume... as I haven't flown any in 4.87) by other small caps (GBs to Cruisers/Destroyers)...also assuming that these smaller ships are ALSO in the hands of very skilled pilots. This is not really an issue because, as with most games involving a certain level of skill, the more skilled will do better. Just because some noob in a Battlecruiser gets beaten by a PvP expert in a Gunboat does NOT mean that Battleships are unbalanced and worthless. It means that you suck, and you need to get better, or change your tactics.
Now, if in the case of 2 PvPers theoretically identical in skill, one might expect the larger, more powerful ship to emerge victorious in a majority of cases, which I would assume is true. If this is not the case...then we could talk about what specific fixes might help that instead of getting on here and just whining about how unbalanced things are, if they even are at all.
Based on some of what I've heard, I have a few ideas that might help out some of the balance issues that people seem to complain about (remembering that there is no real substitute for practice and just getting more skilled)
1) BS Zappers - give them a long reach (1k or so) but minimal damage and make them an effective anti-torpedo weapon, kinda as an alternative to Flaks, but without the area damage. (Heck..I'm not even sure if this is possible already...but would be good if it was)
2) Solaris Gatts - give them longer range (maybe 1.5k) and high refire rate with moderate damage to help BSs not be completely vulnerable to bomber swarms.
3) Increase the range of either BS Secondary or Tertiary weapons so that they can hit Cruisers firing at their own maximum range. The trade off is that their heavy weapons are still only suited for closer combat with other BSes, but they are not completely at the mercy of a Cruiser who can fire out of range.
4) Increase damage of BS Razors, Trebs, Mortars, and Forward Guns...but have them eat up more energy. Makes them a harder-hitting punch...but folks will have to learn how to manage their energy use better (thus, still involving skill)
5) Significantly increase damage of Cap-ship missles, make them use very little energy, but keep them relatively slow.
6) Decrease the number of botts that BSs carry, but increase their Hull points by 30-50%
RE: Who is in charge of balancing caps? - Occam Razor - 06-02-2014
(06-02-2014, 05:13 AM)Unlucky_Soul Wrote: Comparing Discovery Freelancer to WW2 is not an accurate measure for comparisons. WW2 Battleships DO NOT have shields. Also WW2 Ships were always at a disadvantage because ships were more or less stagnant in the water compared with fighters and bombers in the air. If the same fighter/bomber engine was outfitted to a boat it would be slow. Water being a heavier medium than air tends to slow down speed. Also in Water you can move forward or sideways, whereas in air you can do barrel rolls, nose dive etc.Think of water as 2D and the air as 3D. There is more scope of maneuvers for fighters/bombers than a Ship in the water. If you have to make comparisons you make comparisons with a torpedo boat or a gunboat, since they are both on the same playing field. Their success is not so good as fighter or bomber.
Anyways back on track, i think Cap battles in discovery shouldn't be based on skill. it should lean more towards teamwork/strategy.
Of course space is 3D and the water is not. I did not say that Discovery is an exact copy of naval combat in WW2, I just think that it has some similarities, like for example the slow battleships which were good against big targets but bad against small ones. Thus, carriers with fighters and bombers were much more effective against big targets which did not have a great chance of shooting them down.
I like Discovery Capital Ships as they are now, so I don't think there is a need to change that. As stated before, they're highly specialized to fight big targets, like other Battleships and Bases.
RE: Who is in charge of balancing caps? - Lonely_Ghost - 06-03-2014
(06-02-2014, 07:36 PM)Occam Razor Wrote: I like Discovery Capital Ships as they are now, so I don't think there is a need to change that. As stated before, they're highly specialized to fight big targets, like other Battleships and Bases.
I would disagree with that. In your logic, everything, that is not a battleship, should be able to kill it almost efortles, or laugh into it's face and dance around?
While, I agree, that BS should not bother itself with shooting down fighters and things smaler than a cruiser, but it should also have outsanding survivability. At least, nobody would harm each one. 3-4 bombers would never break BS sheilds, BS would never hit even near bomber. In fact, 2 or 3 bombers, together would live longer and do more damage, than 3 battleships.
Discovery actualy gained such great popularity, thanks to capital ships. And now, when they getting nerfed and turned into pointess and useless things, players are leaving. It's probably, not a secret, that dev team is short in time, and members, to creat a well balanced cap ship system (and it's probably impossible for game like freelancer) but would it be more....acceptable, to return cap ship into conditions clouse to 85. It's not because, current caps are large bunch of poo (but it actuacly is), it's just because, in 85, cap's condition was more or less ok. At least, to disable a some battleships, you had to have 3 cruisers or destroyers.
RE: Who is in charge of balancing caps? - Occam Razor - 06-03-2014
(06-03-2014, 12:10 PM)Lonely_Ghost Wrote: I would disagree with that. In your logic, everything, that is not a battleship, should be able to kill it almost efortles, or laugh into it's face and dance around?No, but bombers are specialized in destroying large targets like Battleships, and they're quite good at it. Just like Battleships themselves are quite good at fighting other Battleships.
While, I agree, that BS should not bother itself with shooting down fighters and things smaler than a cruiser, but it should also have outsanding survivability. At least, nobody would harm each one. 3-4 bombers would never break BS sheilds, BS would never hit even near bomber. In fact, 2 or 3 bombers, together would live longer and do more damage, than 3 battleships.
I actually like that Battleships are not the overpowered undestroyable endgame ships that new players always think they are. They're a highly specialized class and should only be used like that. Yes, a bomber squad is always stronger than a single Battleship.
(06-03-2014, 12:10 PM)Lonely_Ghost Wrote: Discovery actualy gained such great popularity, thanks to capital ships. And now, when they getting nerfed and turned into pointess and useless things, players are leaving. It's probably, not a secret, that dev team is short in time, and members, to creat a well balanced cap ship system (and it's probably impossible for game like freelancer) but would it be more....acceptable, to return cap ship into conditions clouse to 85. It's not because, current caps are large bunch of poo (but it actuacly is), it's just because, in 85, cap's condition was more or less ok. At least, to disable a some battleships, you had to have 3 cruisers or destroyers.I don't think that disco got it's popularity due to capital ships. They're a nice feature and probably have influenced the decision of some people joining this server, but I, for example, joined for the Roleplay. And that's the core feature of this server that makes it so special, not capital ships. I also prefer to fly in smaller ships usually, much easier to RP in and less limited in their possibilities.
RE: Who is in charge of balancing caps? - Highland Laddie - 06-03-2014
Lonely_Ghost - 3-4 bombers not even hurt a BS shield? That's ridiculous. It wasn't even that back in 4.85. 2 bombers could seriously hurt a BS.
BS are not the end-all of ships. They are one type of ship in a very diverse group, each with its own advantages AND disadvantages.
People are just being whiners now because folks in gunboats and destroyers are actually able to fight BSes and win.
Adjusting BS stats to help keep them competitive is one thing; making them OP versus everything is something else.
RE: Who is in charge of balancing caps? - Lonely_Ghost - 06-03-2014
(06-03-2014, 12:33 PM)Occam Razor Wrote: No, but bombers are specialized in destroying large targets like Battleships, and they're quite good at it. Just like Battleships themselves are quite good at fighting other Battleships.
I actually like that Battleships are not the overpowered undestroyable endgame ships that new players always think they are. They're a highly specialized class and should only be used like that. Yes, a bomber squad is always stronger than a single Battleship.
Hmm, I would say, that current bomber vs cap balance is totaly biased to bombers side. Normaly, bomber should be used as support ship, in combating against large capital ships. So, we have, for example, 2 cruisers, and 3 bombers, fighting one battleship. Just two cruisers could be not enough to take down BS, and 3 bomber wont do any significant harm to BS, but together, they has very big chances to kill battleship. That, how I see Battleship vs others fight. However............
Battleships has one mayor disadvantages. There could appeares to be a lot of them, in a single fight/action or whatevar, and then, things getting screwed completely. Players, who continiously fighting against large cap ship armadas, on a smaller ships are getting pissed off. BS getting more and more nerfed, because, there are a lot of them, and there should be some alternative to counter cap fleet, than another cap fleet, because, it's going to be megahell, and server overload and blah blah blah.
And, it's Battleship fault? Nope, it's players fault, who own that battleship, and stealing fun from other ppl, who encounter him.
Quote:I don't think that disco got it's popularity due to capital ships. They're a nice feature and probably have influenced the decision of some people joining this server, but I, for example, joined for the Roleplay. And that's the core feature of this server that makes it so special, not capital ships. I also prefer to fly in smaller ships usually, much easier to RP in and less limited in their possibilities.
You may don't think, but it is. Players were interested in having cap, they were griding money by missions, traded and mined. And when they got one, they wanted to have another one, and they went trading again and again and player count was high, and....server fas full.
Just don't say, that everybody wanted to RP so hard.
Second. Caps makes actions. Let's take Sair-Oc war, for example, shall we?
There was a noted groupe of MNS players including me, who were attacking Gamma. Same, there was a noted groupe of CNS & ECG and other folks, who were attacking Alpha & Eta. Yeah, I will say, sometimes we were acting like complete *ags including myself too, on both side, but in mayority of encounters, we had a lot of fun. Now, it's seems that only NPC care to fight a war.
Same could be said to a lots of conflicts. Order/Core, Order/LNS, LN/RM, (without 2te), Sair/Bret. Hell, even mod's greatest war Gall vs Bret. Main action ignitors were cap ships, before, players started to overabyss them.
Players were logging to trade/mine for them, to fly and fight with them, to fight against them.
So agan. It's not something, that it's caps fault, it's rather players fault, who would like to win, sacrificing fun of action, and stealing same right from oposite groupe of players.
(06-03-2014, 12:36 PM)Highland Laddie Wrote: Lonely_Ghost - 3-4 bombers not even hurt a BS shield? That's ridiculous. It wasn't even that back in 4.85. 2 bombers could seriously hurt a BS.
I haven't told that it's currently is. I told, how should be more logical probably. 2 Bombers can hit & kill standing at one place BS. But even in 85, skilled cruiser pilot could give a good fight to 2 bombers.
(06-03-2014, 12:36 PM)Highland Laddie Wrote: BS are not the end-all of ships. They are one type of ship in a very diverse group, each with its own advantages AND disadvantages.
People are just being whiners now because folks in gunboats and destroyers are actually able to fight BSes and win.
Adjusting BS stats to help keep them competitive is one thing; making them OP versus everything is something else.
There is nothing outstanding, when cruisers killing battleship. But it's completely screwed, when cruiser killing battleship.
And ofcrs, BS should not be end-all of ships, nope. I got both of my hands for making battleship impossible to fight fighters and gunboats. In same time I'd like to see battleships being nearly invulnerable to some classes of ships. For example, at least 5 bombers should be able to make noticeable harm to light/med BS. And they would rather drive it away or make a bit weaker, before main reinf arrive, rather than destroying. Fighters & gunboats would never break BS's sheilds, and they don't even need it.
So in fact, we have two seperate groupes. Snubs, and caps. Two different worlds, which don't interfer each one much, but still interacting together.
RE: Who is in charge of balancing caps? - Highland Laddie - 06-03-2014
Large snub battles can be just as much a draw to activity as cap armada battles, so I disregard that argument entirely. People are mostly what draws folks to a server. I certainly didn't feel drawn to this server at first and played on a much smaller one...but eventually liked the fact that I could come onto a server and interact with over 100 players at peak times instead of just 20-30.
The diversity of ship usefulness is actually a GOOD thing, imo, because then it doesn't just become a race to see how many people can get caps and just log big BS fights all the time, which appears to be what you're claiming should be the desired goal. Then why bother having any other ships at all? Let's just make Cap-only server and screw the snubs? GBs? Freighters? Transports? Having diverse fleets makes strategy much more of a factor in ship combat, which I think is great.
Quote:Just two cruisers could be not enough to take down BS, and 3 bomber wont do any significant harm to BS,
Why couldn't they? You seem to be adamant in your belief that this is right...but you seem to have nothing in the way of explaining why it is so. Why is a Battleship seemingly immune from damage against bombers? Simply by mere fact that it's a battleship? That's certainly the kind of mentality that got a lot of Battleships sunk by torpedo bombers in WWII. Or the USS Cole (a destroyer) bombed and significantly damaged by a guy in a small boat with some explosives on it.
I'm gonna post my ideas again...since the conversation seems to roll over them and ignore them.
Quote:1) BS Zappers - give them a long reach (1k or so) but minimal damage and make them an effective anti-torpedo weapon, kinda as an alternative to Flaks, but without the area damage. (Heck..I'm not even sure if this is possible already...but would be good if it was)
2) Solaris Gatts - give them longer range (maybe 1.5k) and high refire rate with moderate damage to help BSs not be completely vulnerable to bomber swarms.
3) Increase the range of either BS Secondary or Tertiary weapons so that they can hit Cruisers firing at their own maximum range. The trade off is that their heavy weapons are still only suited for closer combat with other BSes, but they are not completely at the mercy of a Cruiser who can fire out of range.
4) Increase damage of BS Razors, Trebs, Mortars, and Forward Guns...but have them eat up more energy. Makes them a harder-hitting punch...but folks will have to learn how to manage their energy use better (thus, still involving skill)
5) Significantly increase damage of Cap-ship missles, make them use very little energy, but keep them relatively slow.
6) Decrease the number of botts that BSs carry, but increase their Hull points by 30-50%
The idea behind these changes would be to:
a) make BSes better able to defend themselves against snubs (if they arm themselves correctly)
b) better able to defend themselves against Cruisers/GBs (if they arm themselves correctly and actually have the skill)
c) have more destructive power to better reflect their nature as a heavy-weapon
d) help prevent them from just being bott-feeders to snubs.
Can anyone see any specific drawbacks to those suggestions that would outweigh any benefit they bring?
Let's keep the conversation on the level of discussing the merits or lack thereof of suggested changes instead of just whining about the nature of things as they are/aren't.
RE: Who is in charge of balancing caps? - .Gypsy. - 06-03-2014
(06-03-2014, 12:36 PM)Highland Laddie Wrote: BS are not the end-all of ships.
No, bombers are. They are hands down the most OP ships in the game by FAR (IMO).
Off Topic:
@ EisenSeele, if you want to fly a real battleship, try Freeworlds: ToW, now THAT'S a battleship! I would love to see Disco adopt the Battleship system from Freeworlds: ToW.
Anyway back OT, I do agree battleships should have a massive armor boost. I also think a Battleship shield should be very hard to dent, like perhaps a gun/turret must do a minimum amount of damage to even harm the shield, but not sure what that amount of damage should be. That's just an idea though.
RE: Who is in charge of balancing caps? - Lonely_Ghost - 06-03-2014
(06-03-2014, 04:06 PM)Highland Laddie Wrote: Why couldn't they? You seem to be adamant in your belief that this is right...but you seem to have nothing in the way of explaining why it is so. Why is a Battleship seemingly immune from damage against bombers? Simply by mere fact that it's a battleship? That's certainly the kind of mentality that got a lot of Battleships sunk by torpedo bombers in WWII. Or the USS Cole (a destroyer) bombed and significantly damaged by a guy in a small boat with some explosives on it.
First of all, let's just devide few things. One thing, is real life, with current technologies, other is history facts, like WWII, WWI, other historical naval battles, and another thing is game, which has no solid base on anything we have. Judging actions, which taking place in Disco, and comparing them to current or historical real actions, seems a bit naive to me. I think, that reason is obviouse.
And Laddie, no offence, but you just misunderstood my point, however, it could be my fault too, so sry.
IMO, battleship should not be immunent from damage against bombers completely, nope. Othervise, bombers would loose their job, doesnt they? I'm saying, that battleship should have slightly increased their surviveability. So, 3-4 bombers would just not have enought firepower to harm BS that much. Players would rather fly to base and log couple of cruisers, rather trying to deal with battleship.
And I think, that it's because of battleship's sizes. Battleship has very tight multylayer armor, to defend all the crew, and withstand other physical loads.
WWII battleships had no such armor, to maintain floatage, as far as i know, if Im wrong, I appologise. For same reason, aircrafts has no armor, and simple screwdriver can make a hole in it's hull. So, that would be with hull.
Then let's talk about sheilds. Battleships should have high yield reactors, with large enough power to maintain strong enough sheild, which would hold significant fire and other streses.
Battleship would also have a onboard repair team....
And ofcourse, battleship would have astronyouse mass, which, still not rly imitaited in mod, dunno why.
So, to summarize all this, I'd just say, that bomber's powerplant not generating enough power, to break throught much stronger energy defence, and multylayer armor of battleship. So, 1x bomber powerplant just not, but 5x should be. Like, 5x bomber powergenerators total pike output power could be equeal to normal level poweroutput of a battleship's reactor, feeding sheild projector.
RE: Who is in charge of balancing caps? - Haste - 06-03-2014
(06-03-2014, 04:58 PM).Gypsy. Wrote: No, bombers are. They are hands down the most OP ships in the game by FAR (IMO).
Until you field a single fighter that will handily mop up bombers quickly and efficiently after the recent gun buff (and bomber nerf).
This is why you don't fly caps without escort.