Heavy Fighters VS Very Heavy Fighters

[kikatsu]

Well right now HFs and VHFs are pretty close in terms of performance, heavy fighters being a smidgen more maneuverable and sometimes with smaller hitboxes and a little less firepower. In general however, most are as easy to hit as our normal VHFs because they are just the same ships with slightly different stats. Gallia is currently the only place where HFs have a pretty level playing field, but that is mostly because they are not always fighting VHFs.

There are a couple HFs in Sirius that do standout however, mainly the Marauder, which I have been using to great enjoyment as of late... it has light fighter size and maneuverability, more power capacity than an Eagle, but 4 Class 8s and 2 Class 9s so it cannot dish out as much damage per hit as VHFs.

Is this what a real HF should be like? Something that acts similar to a LF in terms of how you fly it, but has more longevity in terms of power output than VHFs? VHFs would have heavier armor, better shields, more burst firepower but less firing time (they have bigger plants but their guns use much more energy)?


Also to differentiate between HFs and VHFs I am not sure what else that can be done. Cruise speed could be upped to 360 to better intercept things, but LFs would still rule that field in terms of efficiency. Maybe LFs could have their thrust increased to 220 and HFs increased to 210 to allow them to have more of an edge over VHFs in general situations. It would also provide incentive to fly HFs more often, as they become more versatile in general situations, being able to dish out respectable damage while still keeping speed and maneuverability that VHFs exchange for high damage output.


Also as a side note I think it would be better if there is ever a ship naming scheme overhaul that we just call "Heavy Fighters" "Fighters" and call "Very Heavy Fighters" "Heavy Fighters" as this actually adds a fighter class to the game that we lack... we compare LFs and HFs with no actual fighter class... and I think calling something "Very Heavy" is a bit redundant. If we have fast maneuverable combat ships they can be fighters... upgrade their armor, guns, shields, and power to VHF level and they are heavier versions of fighters... Heavy Fighters.



EDIT: I meant for this to be in Discovery Mod General, but I guess it can work here as well.

[kikatsu]

Actually, can a moderator move this to the balance forums?

[Ursus]

Well right now HFs and VHFs are pretty close in terms of performance, heavy fighters being a smidgen more maneuverable and sometimes with smaller hitboxes and a little less firepower. In general however, most are as easy to hit as our normal VHFs because they are just the same ships with slightly different stats. Gallia is currently the only place where HFs have a pretty level playing field, but that is mostly because they are not always fighting VHFs.

There are a couple HFs in Sirius that do standout however, mainly the Marauder, which I have been using to great enjoyment as of late... it has light fighter size and maneuverability, more power capacity than an Eagle, but 4 Class 8s and 2 Class 9s so it cannot dish out as much damage per hit as VHFs.

Is this what a real HF should be like? Something that acts similar to a LF in terms of how you fly it, but has more longevity in terms of power output than VHFs? VHFs would have heavier armor, better shields, more burst firepower but less firing time (they have bigger plants but their guns use much more energy)?

I don't know if there is common agreement on what the ideal role is intended to be. In my opinion the ideal role for a HF is to get behind a VHF or bomber and shoot it down with one full core dump if the target doesn't heal or move (assuming 2 class-8 shield busters and 4 class-9 hull busters). This requires maneuverability (speed and agility) and damage output that can do the job. AFAIK, none of the HFs can do this today since the typical core is too small to support any extended amount of weapons fire, and some of them dont even have the manueverability to get behind a bomber either.

If the HF gets caught from the front, it should lose the joust--this part works fine, since most HFs have weak hull.

Right now, it takes multiple passes for a HF to get in some damage and try to whittle down the enemy, each time puts the HF at risk of being shot down in that single pass, or at least this is why I think it doesn't work.

An HF should also lose to an LF with 2-3 core dumps pretty consistently, just based on the number of guns that are available to the typical LF. I haven't looekd at any LFs yet.

Right now the disco HFs are basically VHFs with 30-40% less hull, power plant, bats and bots, etc. Some of them are very maneuverable, some are about on par with the VHFs for agility, some have smaller profiles, some don't, some have same number of guns (different classes though) some have 1 less. They all have much weaker core and hull. I think the definitive HF is the Bayonet, it handles a dream, has the right number and type of guns, but like the others it is too weak on core. The Liberty Executioner is a poor HF, it is the same size as the Avenger VHF and only slightly better handling, and insufficient core. The Bretonian Paladin is in the middle ground, a little smaller than the VHF, a little more manueverable, too weak on core. The Gallic Serval is a little nicer than the Paladin, but still not as good as the Bayonet. Rheinland and Kusari don't have HFs, they have VHFs with VHF core, hull, weapon mounts, etc, and also fairly nimble for a VHF. I haven't tested the Marauder, it sounds like an overgrown LF.

---

Discovery 24/7 Negotiating Tactics:

[AeternusDoleo]

*shrug* The only difference between a HF and VHF is the name. In terms of gameplay, HFs are typically lighter, more fragile and weaker shielded ships with a lower powercore and inability to mount codeguns, but otherwise have exactly the same perks as VHFs.

's just a name really. I'm against any balance perks for HFs other then them being more maneuverable then a typical VHF (maneuverability over firepower, but less so then LFs who can't kill worth a damn).

---

Wide awake in a world that sleeps, enduring thoughts, enduring scenes. The knowledge of what is yet to come.
From a time when all seems lost, from a dead man to a world, without restraint, unafraid and free.

Mostly retired Discovery member. May still visit from time to time.

[jammi]

Easiest way to give them a distinction would be to balance them all like the Gladiator. Torp and CD slot.

---

News article library, feedback and content requests.

[dodike]

Easiest way to give them a distinction would be to balance them all like the Gladiator. Torp and CD slot.

That just doesn't seem to be a very consistent solution.

[Ursus]

It's just a name really. I'm against any balance perks for HFs other then them being more maneuverable then a typical VHF (maneuverability over firepower, but less so then LFs who can't kill worth a damn).

Alright, don't need rock-paper-scissors in the fighter class. In that case the gap between core and hull should be tightened up a bit so they are a little more survivable. If they are supposed to be VHF with a different name, give them the same basic core and hull, and use limited gun classes as a tradeoff for the slightly better agility.

---

Discovery 24/7 Negotiating Tactics:

[Tachyon]

HFs are fine as they are. Maybe there are just less people, who are good with them.

---

[jakub963]

Why not do the same with fighter guns as we did with turrets.
Our fighters use all in all 4 classes of weapons.
Class 1-2 as the begginer ones you can switch for class 8-9 in just little under half an hour gameplay from fresh start.
Then there are classes 8,9,10 used by pretty much anything... Fighter-like.
Why not sqeeze the classes a little just as it was done with fighter turrets.
Class 1 would be for starters, it would be today's classes 1,2,3...
Class 2 would be more or less stepping stone, weapons currently used by MK1s - Classes 4,5,6,7
Class 3 could be "light" LF weapons* (explanation later)
Class 4 would be "heavy" LF weapons*
Class 5 would be "Light" HF weapons*
Class 6 would be "Heavy" HF weapons*
Class 7 would be "light" VHF weapons*
Class 8 would be "Heavy" VHF weapons*
And we still have 2 classes left for any kind of special weapons there might be, like LF specific dumb-fire rockets or HF specific Torps.

As for "Light" and "Heavy" weapons. Not all ships are the same (size,core,agility,bots).
Given specific number of Light and Heavy weapons (only difference can be the drain and damage output, the easiest option) it would be possible to balance that out. Simmilary for Heavy fighters and Very heavy fighters.

Yes, i do realize that its a lot of work for the balance team and devs... Just saying...

---

[AeternusDoleo]

That just doesn't seem to be a very consistent solution.

Not to mention it'd make factions with access to the shield torpedo a lot more popular...

---

Wide awake in a world that sleeps, enduring thoughts, enduring scenes. The knowledge of what is yet to come.
From a time when all seems lost, from a dead man to a world, without restraint, unafraid and free.

Mostly retired Discovery member. May still visit from time to time.