+- 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: Fixing the Battleship problem and overall balance (/showthread.php?tid=2956)
Fixing the Battleship problem and overall balance - Zyreal - 05-26-2007
Okay, so I played SP Disco for a long time, played on the RP server a bit, then started my own server, and to be honest, Disco is unbalanced. This is mostly corrected on the RP server by forcing players to RP and use weaker ships.
At the moment it currently looks like...
Battleships beat Cruisers, which beat Gunboats, which beat fighters.
This is a horrible balance model. Nothing against Igiss, because he has given us a truly great mod, just the balance has run afoul.
It really needs to run on almost a rock paper scissors system.
Now, I've thought about this quite a bit, but I can't seem to find a solution that doesn't really change the core functions of the capital classes. I wanted to put this thread out there, so people could comment on their views. In the meantime, I'm working on a balance model.
But the idea is that everything should have a counter.
If rock, paper, scissors worked like disco now, rock would beat scissors, and scissors would beat paper, and well, paper would be for the people that couldn't throw rock or scissors, but really, everyone would want a rock. Unless your RP only allowed paper, or only one person in your clan could throw rock, and well, they have the most fun.
And I don't just mean "have fighters beat Battleships" it needs to be a bit more complicated than that.
- Z
Fixing the Battleship problem and overall balance - Virus - 05-27-2007
Bombers, mate. Just get a couple of those and your good against most all capital ships, but no fighters.
Fixing the Battleship problem and overall balance - Zyreal - 05-27-2007
I don't know about that...BS turrets are pretty damn useful against bombers....
Fixing the Battleship problem and overall balance - Spacewolf - 05-27-2007
most vhfs in grups of 2-3 can kill a battleship in fact people are actually complaining about this which is right since a battleship costs the same as a fully modeled system
Fixing the Battleship problem and overall balance - Tortured_Soul - 05-27-2007
My suggestion and rationale.
** Deployment - Refers to the speed at which weapons can be deployed (eg. turn rate of turrets) **
** Hardpoints (Number of / Classification) **
** Silhouette - Essentially the size of the ship, the size of target it presents **
** Tiers - Top to bottom **
Battleships / Dreadnoughts -
Armour: Very High
Shielding: Very High
Powerplant: Medium
Hardpoints: High / High
Deployment: Very Low
Speed: Low
Maneuverability: Low
Nanobots: High
Shield Batteries: High
Silhouette: Very Large
Range: Long
Should be primarily concerned with combating the top two tier classes, not so much lower classes. High powered weaponry to combat the high armour of targets, slow deployment as target should be at a low speed and have poor maneuverability, also negating effectiveness against low tier ships.
Cruisers / Light Cruisers -
Armour: High
Shielding: High
Powerplant: Medium
Hardpoints: High / Medium
Deployment: Medium-Low
Speed: Medium-Low
Maneuverability: Low
Nanobots: High
Shield Batteries: High
Silhouette: Large
Range: Long
Should be able to knock a sizeable amount of health (60%) out of a Tier 1 vessel before being destroyed. Deployment should be slow, but some (2-4) very low power hardpoints should be fitted for Low tier ship combat. Light Cruisers should be much more compact than standard cruisers, but should be much lower armour and have weaponry concentrated at the front.
Corvettes / Gunboats -
Armour: Low
Shielding: High
Powerplant: High
Hardpoints: Medium / Low
Deployment: Medium-Fast
Speed: High
Maneuverability: Medium
Nanobots: Low
Shield Batteries: High
Silhouette: Medium
Range: Short
Should be able to hold it's own against a wing of fighters but be of little effect against Tier 1 and 2 vessels. Primary role should be close contact with low tier fighters. Vulnerable once shields are down, but high power plant for sustained fire.
Heavy Fighter / Bomber -
Armour: Medium
Shielding: Medium
Powerplant: Low
Hardpoints: Medium / Medium
Deployment: Fast
Speed: Medium-Fast
Maneuverability: Medium
Nanobots: Low
Shield Batteries: Low
Silhouette: Low
Range: Medium
Heavy Fighter classes should be used for close contact with low tier vessels, perhaps armed with low yield torpedo for pot-shots at tier 1 and 2 vessels (controlled via power-plant rating and fire energy for torpedo launcher). Bomber class should be for engaging Tier 1 and 2 vessels at medium, with a couple of close contact turrets for low tier targets.
Fighter -
Armour: Low
Shielding: Low
Powerplant: Medium
Hardpoints: Low / Low
Deployment: Fast
Speed: Fast
Maneuverability: Very High
Nanobots: Low
Shield Batteries: Low
Silhouette: Very Low
Range: Short
Only for close contact targets, limited effectiveness against tier 3 vessels.
Freighter -
Armour: Medium
Shielding: Low
Powerplant: Low
Hardpoints: Low / Low
Deployment: Fast
Speed: Medium
Maneuverability: Low
Nanobots: High
Shield Batteries: High
Silhouette: Medium
Range: Short
The non-combatant, should only engage when defending itself. Best tactic is to run away.
=========================================================
In writing this, I've probably put down a whole load of stuff that is either unimplementable or that's going to be ignored. I wrote it to provide a basis for a class system that would combat the situation Zyreal described in his first post. It's all my own ideas. I've based around a fleet tactic though, rather than a single ship combat, so really it's more for clan / RP clan battles.
If you want to suggest changes, feel free, but don't just say, "Soul, you're a tosser, it's THIS!". Say, "Soul, you're a tosser. I think it should be this because...". I do also realise that this isn't based around the FL ship classes, but I never liked them anyway, to much of a gap me thinks.
Posted at 0206h GMT, started typing at 0139h GMT, I'm tired, be gentle.
Fixing the Battleship problem and overall balance - Zyreal - 05-27-2007
I like yours tortured soul, and might I make an addition..
Bomber -
Armor: Low
Shielding: Low
Powerplant: Very High
Hardpoints: Low / High
Deployment: Very Slow
Speed: Medium-Fast
Maneuverability: Medium-Fast
Nanobots: Low
Shield Batteries: Low
Silhouette: Low-Medium
Range: Short
Bomber should have two class 4 turrets with 360 rotation, but more powerful, yet slower torpedoes. A Top Teir Vessel without Fighter, or better yet, Gunboat support, wouldn't stand a chance. But it has to be virtually ineffective against fighters and gunboats.
Right now Bombers are so slow I have no problem picking them off with a Battleship's turrets.
I agree with TS that cap ships should be forced into fleet combat, that a BS without at least one of the following, cruiser, gunboat, or fighter support, should be pretty hopeless.
And if you wanted to fill out the classes just a bit more, a long range torpedo boat, like a gunboat, but with maybe one turret, that has extremely long range unguided torps. Make them relitively slow moving so that if the BS does spot them, the fighters can blow them out of space. Adding almost a submarine type feel to the game.
You could even completely revamp the Gunboat class, and give it's abilities to cruisers, and just give it one anti-fighter turret, one gunboat forward gun, and two or four VERY slow reloading LONG range torp slots. Literally make it into a space submarine.
Fixing the Battleship problem and overall balance - Craines - 05-27-2007
A biplane cannot take out the Bismarck, my friends. The same should apply to a battleship v. fighter in FL.
There should be ABSOLUTELY NO chance that a fighter can take out a battleship alone. The battleship could be slightly, so very slightly, damaged or inconvenienced, but impossible to destroy or make run away.
On that same rationale, it should be difficult for the battleship to take out the fighter, but, seeing as how it would be a battle of attrition, the battleship will eventually win.
That's my vote.
Wait a sec, I need to rephrase it in Tortured Soul's way... hmm..
"No, you tosser, it should be... whatever I wrote above!" Does that work?
Teehee, just kidding, you're not a tosser.
Harley
Fixing the Battleship problem and overall balance - Zyreal - 05-27-2007
Quote:A biplane cannot take out the Bismarck, my friends. The same should apply to a battleship v. fighter in FL.
There should be ABSOLUTELY NO chance that a fighter can take out a battleship alone. The battleship could be slightly, so very slightly, damaged or inconvenienced, but impossible to destroy or make run away.
On that same rationale, it should be difficult for the battleship to take out the fighter, but, seeing as how it would be a battle of attrition, the battleship will eventually win.
That's my vote.
Wait a sec, I need to rephrase it in Tortured Soul's way... hmm..
"No, you tosser, it should be... whatever I wrote above!" Does that work?
Teehee, just kidding, you're not a tosser.
Harley
Well to be honest, although the bismark was sunk by the King George V, both Yamato Class Battleships, the biggest Battleships to ever sail the seas, were both taken down by fighters. The Musashi (One of two Yamato class battleships) was taken down by almost all aircraft. And the Yamato (The flagship) was defeated purely by a carriers aircraft.
Oh and the Tirpitz, the other "big german battleship" of WWII was taken out of action by fighter attacks...since other big ships couldn't get close.
The biggest threat by far to battleships are aircraft.
EDIT: I was wrong, a Fairey Swordfish aircraft was what crippled the Bismark, and allowed her to be picked off by the King George. So ironically, yes, a bi-plane did sink (or at least did most of the sinking) of the bismark. So all four of the major Enemy Battleships in WWII were sunk all or in major part by aircraft.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Swordfish (The bi-plane that sunk the bismark in all its glory) (Sorry Harley, no hard feelings) =)
Fixing the Battleship problem and overall balance - Dab - 05-27-2007
Right now;
Battleship beats Cruiser, Cruiser beats Gunboat, Gunboat beat fighters and bombers, bombers kill Battleships and Cruisers, Fighters defeat other fighters and bombers. 3 or more fighters can beat a cruiser and gunboat, and with sufficient skill, a battleship.
So:
Battleship is defeated by:
2+ Cruisers
3+ Gunboats
3+ Fighters
1+ Bombers
15+ Freighters [with exception to Container Transport, which will only need 10]
Cruiser is defeated by:
1+ Battleships
2+ Gunboats
3+ Fighters
1+ Bombers
10+ Freighters [5 for Container Transports]
Gunboat is defeated by:
1+ Battleships
1+ Cruisers
2+ Fighters [Depends greatly on fighter pilot's skills]
2+ Bombers [If the bomber pilot is VERY good, one alone can defeat the GB.]
5+ Freighters
Fighter is defeated by:
1+ Battleships
1+ Cruisers
1+ Gunboats
Bomber depends on fighter pilot's skills and bomber's skills. Rationally, 2 or more bombers should be able to defeat a fighter, depending on their loadouts.
2+ Freighters [greatly depends on the freighter pilot's aiming skills, and the fighter pilot's dodging skills.]
Bomber is defeated by:
Battleship depends on bomber pilot's dodging skills and aiming skills, as well as his energy management. Also depends on battleship pilot's aiming skills, and torp-dodging skills.
Cruiser is same as above, but the bomber has a much higher chance of killing the cruiser, than the cruiser has a chance of killing the bomber.
Gunboat is same as battleship, but the GB has a better chance than the bomber.
1+ Fighter
Freighters compared to bombers are basically lambs to a T-Rex..
Guys, remember, IF there were three of so Bi-planes attacking the Bismark, and they all had one large and rather lethal torpedo (and what torpedo is not lethal?) than Bismark goes bye bye, if the fighters are smart about where they hit with the torps. A couple fighters, using skill instead of firepower, can defeat a battleship, real life, or FL. BSs shouldn't be god ships, else there would be no fighters. And personally, I think we already have enough BS problems, lets not compound the situation.
All in all, the mod is quite balanced towards skillful and tactical use defeating overwhelming firepower and numbers. This is what most games, should and do, strive for.
Such as on EVE, Goonswarm with its 5,000 members in small little frigates (the equivalent of an FL fighter). They swarm hundreds of small frigates, against Dreadnaughts (equivalent of super-battleships of FL) and usually win. Now say the dreadnaught owners bring in a Titan. Titan uses Doomsday weapon (Aurora) that deals massive damage through the ENTIRE solar system. Well those frigates can't stop from being killed by it, while most dreadnaughts and carriers will be able to warp to another system in time. Frigates have to use Jump Gates. Well say goodbye to those hundreds of frigates. All in all, anything can be killed by something. Except those electronic warfare-immune Titans with DDs and millions of tons of hull. True, can be killed by hundreds of Dreadnaughts and Carriers, but there is no way to stop the Titan from running after dropping a Doomsday bomb. Since warp jammers don't work.. Electronic-warfare immune remember? Damn ultras:dry:<- Off-topic
Fixing the Battleship problem and overall balance - Craines - 05-27-2007
Technicalities, they matter not. They were BOMBERS, not FIGHTERS. I mean a little tiny, machine gun wielding biplane.