Forums » Suggestions
It's easy to see a cap ship at 10k, however.
That's why I would like to see some longer range weapons that cap ships could engage each other with, but as Harry Seldon points out, they would *have* to be ineffective against fighters. Otherwise they could instantly tag any ship in the sector.
I really think beam cannons with their instant hits are the ideal point defense weapon. Engaging a large, slow moving object like a cap ship doesn't require an instant hit, but taking out a fighter at 750m does.
To have a weapon that is effective against cap ships, but not fighters, it needs to have a relatively slow shot velocity. Something that fighters could see coming and dodge, but not necessarily cap ships.
We used to have the Avalon torpedo with its 30s duration... launched from a ship at 220 m/s, it had a maximum range of 6.6k.
I'd like to see a cap ship turret that launched an Avalon torpedo at, say 250 m/s with a refire rate of 5 seconds, detonation on contact only. This would do massive damage to other cap ships, even at a distance, but would be impractical against fighters.
The beam weapons are perfect for surgically taking out fighters and bombers that stray too close. The avalon launcher would be the HAC's primary ship-to-ship weapon.
That's why I would like to see some longer range weapons that cap ships could engage each other with, but as Harry Seldon points out, they would *have* to be ineffective against fighters. Otherwise they could instantly tag any ship in the sector.
I really think beam cannons with their instant hits are the ideal point defense weapon. Engaging a large, slow moving object like a cap ship doesn't require an instant hit, but taking out a fighter at 750m does.
To have a weapon that is effective against cap ships, but not fighters, it needs to have a relatively slow shot velocity. Something that fighters could see coming and dodge, but not necessarily cap ships.
We used to have the Avalon torpedo with its 30s duration... launched from a ship at 220 m/s, it had a maximum range of 6.6k.
I'd like to see a cap ship turret that launched an Avalon torpedo at, say 250 m/s with a refire rate of 5 seconds, detonation on contact only. This would do massive damage to other cap ships, even at a distance, but would be impractical against fighters.
The beam weapons are perfect for surgically taking out fighters and bombers that stray too close. The avalon launcher would be the HAC's primary ship-to-ship weapon.
The way I see beam weapons, the light ones are both for helping against fighters, as well as aiding the flak cannons, while the heavy ones burn through enemy cap ships hulls, and add to the "oooOOOOoooo" factor (wow factor). It really is very cool to have beams blazing away, especially as you dodge between multiple frigates duking it out. However, if you make these fights possible thousands of meters away from each other, then things become much less cool, at least up close and personal.
Right now the problem with the fights between capships is that they have this overwhelming desire to be within 300m of the other, or to point at the other. This kinda ruins the battle because we will have turrets on the sides and back not getting any action except for when fighters decide to poke them.
I disagree with the dire need of projectile weapons for a capship to capship weapon, a couple beam cannons could work well. These would do huge amounts of damage, say 14k, have a 20 second charge time, if it is released before it is fully charged it would fail to fire, while charging the turret would appear to glow. As well as a charge time there would be a 40 second cool-down time which brings it to a total of 1 minute between shots. When the beam fires there would be a small beam at first that does 500 damage per second, which grows to 8000 damage per second after a couple seconds, then tapers off. This would give fighters in the way a chance to get out of the way before the main blast, and if they don't then they're foolish. As the damage increases the size of the beam would increase as well.
1s - 500
2s - 500
3s - 1500
4s - 4000
5s - 8000
The turrets that use this weapon would have very little auto-aim and an energy cell. The energy cell would have a capacity of 1000, the weapon would drain 500 energy, and the cell would recharge at a staggering rate of 5 per second. This would have an 100 second recharge time needed between shots once the battery has been depleted, and the weapon will not charge without the needed amount of energy, causing a depleted battery to have the weapon have a re-fire rate of 120 seconds, double of the charged battery re-fire rate.
I disagree with the dire need of projectile weapons for a capship to capship weapon, a couple beam cannons could work well. These would do huge amounts of damage, say 14k, have a 20 second charge time, if it is released before it is fully charged it would fail to fire, while charging the turret would appear to glow. As well as a charge time there would be a 40 second cool-down time which brings it to a total of 1 minute between shots. When the beam fires there would be a small beam at first that does 500 damage per second, which grows to 8000 damage per second after a couple seconds, then tapers off. This would give fighters in the way a chance to get out of the way before the main blast, and if they don't then they're foolish. As the damage increases the size of the beam would increase as well.
1s - 500
2s - 500
3s - 1500
4s - 4000
5s - 8000
The turrets that use this weapon would have very little auto-aim and an energy cell. The energy cell would have a capacity of 1000, the weapon would drain 500 energy, and the cell would recharge at a staggering rate of 5 per second. This would have an 100 second recharge time needed between shots once the battery has been depleted, and the weapon will not charge without the needed amount of energy, causing a depleted battery to have the weapon have a re-fire rate of 120 seconds, double of the charged battery re-fire rate.
Phaser: That's why the 10k beam weapon has terrible tracking. It won't hit fighters unless the fighter stumbles right into it, and should probably have some sort of effect to let us know its about to fire.
It doesn't make sense to fire a slow moving projectile at a target 10km out... even a capship can get out of the way of that. You'd use a beam to hit something that far out, or a projectile that would be fired so fast as to be the same as a beam. Otherwise the cap could just do a nice lumbering turn or even a roll and evade.
It doesn't make sense to fire a slow moving projectile at a target 10km out... even a capship can get out of the way of that. You'd use a beam to hit something that far out, or a projectile that would be fired so fast as to be the same as a beam. Otherwise the cap could just do a nice lumbering turn or even a roll and evade.
what if the avalon torpedo was only VERY SLIGHTLY able to track a target so that it could track cap ships, but fighters can dodge out of the way. It would still be contact detonation. And to ensure that it isnt used on fighters, it could have a 2 second timer before it can detonate.
Okay, I guess I'm in the minority here, but I have two issues with having the beam weapons as the primary "ship to ship" weapon. I was honestly a little surprised when the beam weapons were introduced, since they are a fundamentally new type of weapon. I think they work great as point defense weapons, but I really really think it would be a bad idea to give them a range any greater than 750m, and I don't think they should be the HAC's primary weapon.
First of all, they are instant hit. I don't think having slow tracking is going to make as much of a difference as you think, particularly at long ranges. Say a beam turret has an abysmal tracking rate of 10 degrees per second, about as slow as the cap ship can turn afaik (it would take at least 15 seconds to track across the turret's field of view at this rate).
Slow tracking as it is, the area this turret can sweep across at 750m would be equal to Vrot*(pi)R; 65 meters per second. Not so bad, a boosting ship could easily evade this. However, at 5k range, this same turret would be able to sweep across 436 meters per second. No fighter could hope to evade this.
Do you see what I'm getting at? The further out you go, the harder and harder it becomes to evade an instant hit beam weapon, regardless of how slow the turret tracks. Therefore these beam weapons would be the *most* effective at their maximum range.
With a projectile weapon, you have the added factor of shot velocity. It takes time for the shot to get out to 5k, so there is a time lag, giving the pilot opportunity to take evasive action. This is fundamentally different from an instant hit beam weapon, and this is why I think it would be a bad idea to give the beams a range any longer than 750m, unless something like SL's suggestion were implemented.
Second of all, range of engagement. Am I the only one that thinks it looks a little silly when cap ships have to bump noses just to hit each other? Watch the movie Master and Commander, that is what I think capital ship warfare should be like. Whereas fighter pilot combat should be about lightning quick reflexes and split second, gut-instinct decisions, capital ship warfare should be about strategy, positioning, and battle tactics. To allow for this the playing field needs to be opened up; we need longer range cap ship weapons. Otherwise I guarantee strategy will deteriorate into a "sidle up alongside the other ship and slug it out until the weaker ship explodes" contest.
The beam weapons are cool, but I urge the devs to consider long range projectiles (or possibly slow tracking missiles, but I would prefer projectiles) for ship-to-ship battles. I'm guessing that with the current maneuverability of the cap ships that if a projectile reaches the target within 10 seconds, it will have a good chance of hitting. Therefore a 250 m/s projectile would have an effective range of 2.5k. This could be tweaked either way as needed of course. We already have this type of weapon and it would take less work to implement than turrets that track at a fixed rate or a "damage over time" beam weapon.
As for the "oooOOOOooo" factor, just wait until you see an Avalon torpedo detonate ;)
First of all, they are instant hit. I don't think having slow tracking is going to make as much of a difference as you think, particularly at long ranges. Say a beam turret has an abysmal tracking rate of 10 degrees per second, about as slow as the cap ship can turn afaik (it would take at least 15 seconds to track across the turret's field of view at this rate).
Slow tracking as it is, the area this turret can sweep across at 750m would be equal to Vrot*(pi)R; 65 meters per second. Not so bad, a boosting ship could easily evade this. However, at 5k range, this same turret would be able to sweep across 436 meters per second. No fighter could hope to evade this.
Do you see what I'm getting at? The further out you go, the harder and harder it becomes to evade an instant hit beam weapon, regardless of how slow the turret tracks. Therefore these beam weapons would be the *most* effective at their maximum range.
With a projectile weapon, you have the added factor of shot velocity. It takes time for the shot to get out to 5k, so there is a time lag, giving the pilot opportunity to take evasive action. This is fundamentally different from an instant hit beam weapon, and this is why I think it would be a bad idea to give the beams a range any longer than 750m, unless something like SL's suggestion were implemented.
Second of all, range of engagement. Am I the only one that thinks it looks a little silly when cap ships have to bump noses just to hit each other? Watch the movie Master and Commander, that is what I think capital ship warfare should be like. Whereas fighter pilot combat should be about lightning quick reflexes and split second, gut-instinct decisions, capital ship warfare should be about strategy, positioning, and battle tactics. To allow for this the playing field needs to be opened up; we need longer range cap ship weapons. Otherwise I guarantee strategy will deteriorate into a "sidle up alongside the other ship and slug it out until the weaker ship explodes" contest.
The beam weapons are cool, but I urge the devs to consider long range projectiles (or possibly slow tracking missiles, but I would prefer projectiles) for ship-to-ship battles. I'm guessing that with the current maneuverability of the cap ships that if a projectile reaches the target within 10 seconds, it will have a good chance of hitting. Therefore a 250 m/s projectile would have an effective range of 2.5k. This could be tweaked either way as needed of course. We already have this type of weapon and it would take less work to implement than turrets that track at a fixed rate or a "damage over time" beam weapon.
As for the "oooOOOOooo" factor, just wait until you see an Avalon torpedo detonate ;)
Tha AI needs to be changed for one thing. Capitle ships should try to turn their broadsides toward eash other in combat. that is where they have the most guns. it's esentaly the oposit if fighter battles.
The ideal tactic that the cap ships should try for is to bring their broadside to bare on the bow or stern of the enemy vessil. This tactic was called "raking" in the age of sailing ships. the philosophy is this:
if i have a 72 gun ship then i have 32 guns on each side and 2 that can fire forward or backward, so i want to bring my 32 guns to bare on a target that can only return fire with it's 2 forward guns rather than go broadside to broadside with another 72 gun ship. And i definately don't want to point my 2 bow chasers into my oponents 32 gun broadside if i can avoid it.
this tactic remais valid untill ships have large turrets that can cover any angle and fire at an engagment range mesuring in 10s of kilometers. and even then depending on the mounting of the turrets a broadside may still be more efective than pointint your bow towards the enemy.
also i think the beem cannons are fine as it is. You have to be a fool to think that a lone fighter is a match for a capitle ship. if that were the case there would be no capitle ships. The re introduction of avalon torpedos (or something like them) does seem a nesesity. I would recomend a seeking missile that has no proxcimity, a splash radious of 30m poor tracking, a velosity around 70m/s and a duration of 10 seconds. that way it could be used at or just beyond the range of beem cannons, witout much need for a stable launch platform (so the pilet has a chance at evading the beem cannons long enough to fire and turbo back out), but any fighter could esily evade the torpedo. also i'd like to see the torpedo able to be shot down by a limited number of poinjt deffence gattling turrets, however there should be large blindespots in the coverage of the defensive gattling turrets.
also i would recomend the cap ship have an uber railgun for fighting other capitle ships. that way it can be doged by fighters at long range but might get lucky and catch one at short range and can still be usable against cap ships.
One last point. I think the cap ships will be coolest if their tactics an weapon loads are based somwaht off those on the 1800s sailing ships. these ships could fire at long grange with their cannons but the would almost never hit (railguns would be a good aproxamation) so they tended to come realy close to one another so they could pummel each other with their brodasides. i envision this ideal engagment range to be about 2km (that's about 2.5 cap ship lenths) they should be able to fire at ranges aproaching 8 to 10 km, but only with perjectile or missile weapons. and then they have anti fighter weapons for ranges less than 1 km.
if we wanted to be realistic than the cap ships would all be equipped with 3 times as many beem canons, and avalon torpedos that were seeking with an efective range well oner 1000km. Even the exploration ships built by the federation in Star Trek were equipped with 110s of photon topedos, and shields that made even thermonuclear weapns usless.
but we realy don't want something that deadly, we want something that will be cool and look fermiliar yet futuristic and still be powerfull enough to be feared.
The ideal tactic that the cap ships should try for is to bring their broadside to bare on the bow or stern of the enemy vessil. This tactic was called "raking" in the age of sailing ships. the philosophy is this:
if i have a 72 gun ship then i have 32 guns on each side and 2 that can fire forward or backward, so i want to bring my 32 guns to bare on a target that can only return fire with it's 2 forward guns rather than go broadside to broadside with another 72 gun ship. And i definately don't want to point my 2 bow chasers into my oponents 32 gun broadside if i can avoid it.
this tactic remais valid untill ships have large turrets that can cover any angle and fire at an engagment range mesuring in 10s of kilometers. and even then depending on the mounting of the turrets a broadside may still be more efective than pointint your bow towards the enemy.
also i think the beem cannons are fine as it is. You have to be a fool to think that a lone fighter is a match for a capitle ship. if that were the case there would be no capitle ships. The re introduction of avalon torpedos (or something like them) does seem a nesesity. I would recomend a seeking missile that has no proxcimity, a splash radious of 30m poor tracking, a velosity around 70m/s and a duration of 10 seconds. that way it could be used at or just beyond the range of beem cannons, witout much need for a stable launch platform (so the pilet has a chance at evading the beem cannons long enough to fire and turbo back out), but any fighter could esily evade the torpedo. also i'd like to see the torpedo able to be shot down by a limited number of poinjt deffence gattling turrets, however there should be large blindespots in the coverage of the defensive gattling turrets.
also i would recomend the cap ship have an uber railgun for fighting other capitle ships. that way it can be doged by fighters at long range but might get lucky and catch one at short range and can still be usable against cap ships.
One last point. I think the cap ships will be coolest if their tactics an weapon loads are based somwaht off those on the 1800s sailing ships. these ships could fire at long grange with their cannons but the would almost never hit (railguns would be a good aproxamation) so they tended to come realy close to one another so they could pummel each other with their brodasides. i envision this ideal engagment range to be about 2km (that's about 2.5 cap ship lenths) they should be able to fire at ranges aproaching 8 to 10 km, but only with perjectile or missile weapons. and then they have anti fighter weapons for ranges less than 1 km.
if we wanted to be realistic than the cap ships would all be equipped with 3 times as many beem canons, and avalon torpedos that were seeking with an efective range well oner 1000km. Even the exploration ships built by the federation in Star Trek were equipped with 110s of photon topedos, and shields that made even thermonuclear weapns usless.
but we realy don't want something that deadly, we want something that will be cool and look fermiliar yet futuristic and still be powerfull enough to be feared.
I'd personally like to see the locations of the main capital beam cannons be selectable.
A person who prefers to fight broadside battles would stick most of their weapons on the sides (or the tops, depending on taste), and anti-fighter weapons everwhere else. These ships would have anti-fighter blind spots on the sides unless the captain wants to sacrifice throw weight for extra protection, and they would be vulnerable to attacks from above and below.
A person who wants to be generally effective against everything from all directions will space out their main cannons and mix the anti-fighter guns amongst them so they sacrifice being able to concentrate fire in any one direction, but would be at a definite advantage if surrounded.
A person who prefers to fight broadside battles would stick most of their weapons on the sides (or the tops, depending on taste), and anti-fighter weapons everwhere else. These ships would have anti-fighter blind spots on the sides unless the captain wants to sacrifice throw weight for extra protection, and they would be vulnerable to attacks from above and below.
A person who wants to be generally effective against everything from all directions will space out their main cannons and mix the anti-fighter guns amongst them so they sacrifice being able to concentrate fire in any one direction, but would be at a definite advantage if surrounded.
CP, when players get the ability to purchase frigates, won't they also be able to choose what weapons they place into certain ports anyway? I'm sure it'll be like any other ship. Except there'll be specialized ports and some variation of weapons to choose from. For example 6 XL ports and 6 XXL ports or whatever (I don't know how many total turrets there are so I'm just pulling these numbers out of my ass). And you could equip them at whatever locations you want just like you currently do with fighters. Wouldn't that be cool?
;-)
;-)
Phaesr: I imagined it as having a one second growing glow effect before firing. If you see the turret start to glow, you dodge. Once firing, the turret can't change angle.
Also, I think you're giving the turret user far too much credit. To be able to hit something at 10k would require incredible accuracy - because just as the distance increases, the arc of fire increases, so does the effect of inremental change on the firing angle.
Alternate solutions would be to only allow cap ship beams to fire on cap ships, or just accept the reality that anyone coming on a straight run at a cap ship SHOULD get annihilated.
The "wow" of avalons can't compare to the "wow" of beam cannons.
Also, I think you're giving the turret user far too much credit. To be able to hit something at 10k would require incredible accuracy - because just as the distance increases, the arc of fire increases, so does the effect of inremental change on the firing angle.
Alternate solutions would be to only allow cap ship beams to fire on cap ships, or just accept the reality that anyone coming on a straight run at a cap ship SHOULD get annihilated.
The "wow" of avalons can't compare to the "wow" of beam cannons.
Phaesr: I imagined it as having a one second growing glow effect before firing. If you see the turret start to glow, you dodge. Once firing, the turret can't change angle.
I dunno. I personally think that it would be really cool to have a turret that could track *very slowly*, so we could direct the beam *across* the hull of the enemy ship, burning a swath across it. Also, if the cappie is near death, or is killed by a beam shot, I think the beam ought to burn through the cap ship.
And yes, hitting stuff without autoaim even at 1km is pretty tricky. I was tagging mines on Saturday, and it took a few tries to get it right, and the mines weren't even moving. However, I'm going to reiterate that I don't think that the beam cannons shouldn't be so long that you have to look twice to make sure that there really is a capital ship there. For larger cappies, the range would understandably be longer, but for our current ones, the range should really be 2.5-3km max, if even for the reason that we don't want players just passing through the system to be at risk, or just sitting and watching the cap ship from afar. I really don't understand the "10km max" thing that everyone is pushing....
I dunno. I personally think that it would be really cool to have a turret that could track *very slowly*, so we could direct the beam *across* the hull of the enemy ship, burning a swath across it. Also, if the cappie is near death, or is killed by a beam shot, I think the beam ought to burn through the cap ship.
And yes, hitting stuff without autoaim even at 1km is pretty tricky. I was tagging mines on Saturday, and it took a few tries to get it right, and the mines weren't even moving. However, I'm going to reiterate that I don't think that the beam cannons shouldn't be so long that you have to look twice to make sure that there really is a capital ship there. For larger cappies, the range would understandably be longer, but for our current ones, the range should really be 2.5-3km max, if even for the reason that we don't want players just passing through the system to be at risk, or just sitting and watching the cap ship from afar. I really don't understand the "10km max" thing that everyone is pushing....
Stop thinking in exclusives, people! Why can't we have some uber-damage beam weapons that can't track while firing, and other beam weapons that can track while firing?
I think the agt turrents looked much cooler, they just where so worthless at hitting anything. The beams are a tad overkill, you can not get within a 1000m of a cap without getting fried. It did develope some interresting tactics. I noticed people in missle rags standing out of range and pounding the turrents. I noticed one fighter flying around his cap ship like he was flying aircap or something. ( I assume to hit those missle rags.)
I'd like to see the defensive tweeked just enough so that fighters are temped to do a fly by strafing (so we can see the pretty fireworks and watch them get fried up close).
The biggest problem I see is that a cap ship needs a jump supressor. If it sees any enemy ship inside of 3000m, it turns on it's jump supressor to keep the enemy from doing a flyby-jump attack. This will give the defenders half a chance to chase down those missle rags.
The cap might also need at least one missle lancher (anything that will give those missle rags at least something to think about).
I'd like to see the defensive tweeked just enough so that fighters are temped to do a fly by strafing (so we can see the pretty fireworks and watch them get fried up close).
The biggest problem I see is that a cap ship needs a jump supressor. If it sees any enemy ship inside of 3000m, it turns on it's jump supressor to keep the enemy from doing a flyby-jump attack. This will give the defenders half a chance to chase down those missle rags.
The cap might also need at least one missle lancher (anything that will give those missle rags at least something to think about).
Well after several deaths and lots of different ship/weapon configurations here are some of my thoughts.
The beam cannons are very cool, look awesome, and are very devistating. They are almost too powerful in that if your within range you might as well explode cause you will sooner rather then later. Personally, I think the HAC's should only have 1 maybe 2 beam cannoons that are ONLY forward mounted that are used specifically for destroying other HAC's. Could make the beam graphic twice as thick and do twice the damage per shot. Then instead of having a bunch of mini-beam cannons on the turrets, bring back the agts, but add both missle turrets and rockets launchers.
If you want to keep the beam-cannon turrets then I suggest that their range be shortand or that they be less able to track or put on a scale of damage, so that at max range they don't have full power but as you get closer the power is increase. It also should not be treated as a shot like a rail gun, but as a beam, so instead of seeing it fade away from the turret to the target, see a solid beam that can move while the trigger is helt and can make sweeping/cutting motions. Give it a 3-5 second hold period then it has to charge for another shot, say 5 seconds.
-------------
As for the smaller LAC (Light Assault Cruiser) they are very cool, though they need to be a bit more armed, though I know that it's only in testing at the moment. Give it a few of the über AGT's and perhaps a single beam-cannon on the front, or two, one on each wing.
The beam cannons are very cool, look awesome, and are very devistating. They are almost too powerful in that if your within range you might as well explode cause you will sooner rather then later. Personally, I think the HAC's should only have 1 maybe 2 beam cannoons that are ONLY forward mounted that are used specifically for destroying other HAC's. Could make the beam graphic twice as thick and do twice the damage per shot. Then instead of having a bunch of mini-beam cannons on the turrets, bring back the agts, but add both missle turrets and rockets launchers.
If you want to keep the beam-cannon turrets then I suggest that their range be shortand or that they be less able to track or put on a scale of damage, so that at max range they don't have full power but as you get closer the power is increase. It also should not be treated as a shot like a rail gun, but as a beam, so instead of seeing it fade away from the turret to the target, see a solid beam that can move while the trigger is helt and can make sweeping/cutting motions. Give it a 3-5 second hold period then it has to charge for another shot, say 5 seconds.
-------------
As for the smaller LAC (Light Assault Cruiser) they are very cool, though they need to be a bit more armed, though I know that it's only in testing at the moment. Give it a few of the über AGT's and perhaps a single beam-cannon on the front, or two, one on each wing.
LordQ: I agree that the 1800s were the golden age of Naval tactics. Often times a naval engagement between two ships could last days, it often took a Ship of the Line six hours just to "come about." Obviously things will be faster paced in a game like Vendetta, but using a ship's geometry to one's advantage, the angle of engagement, location of asteroids as well as the rest of the fleet, I hope these will all be factors in cap ship combat.
How can I say this... it would break my heart to see cap ships in Vendetta that have to close to point blank before getting in range of each other. That was probably my biggest pet peeve with the game X-wing vs. Tie Fighter.
Even in the 19th century, most ships had cannon ranges at least 10x their own ship length. http://www.kipar.org/piratical-resources/pirate-weapons.html Yes, there were blistering point-blank broadsides, but there were also long, drawn out chases, surprise attacks from beyond visual range (watch the opening scene from Master and Commander). A point blank broadside may have been the most devastating, but this was by no means the only tactic. At close range cannons were more effective because they were more accurate, but there was always the long distance volley as two ships closed to engage.
Projectiles could be this for cap ships. It could be possible for the captain of a cap ship to be caught unaware by a volley from another cap ship 10k away, but this would be rare. The maximum effective range of a projectile volley between cap ships would probably be more like 2-3k.
More agile cap ships could maneuver just outside of the HAC's range, using its smaller size and greater maneuverability to its advantage. With projectiles you have uncertainty because of the time lag... a full volley may have an 80% hit rate on a large ship at 3k, but a 30% hit rate on a small cap ship at 2k.
With beam weapons it's 100% accuracy, every time. You are either in range or you are out of range, there's no grey area in between. Cap ship combat becomes an out and out slugfest. Sure I think cap ships should have a variety of weapons, but right now all they have are beam weapons... which I am convinced would not work as a long range offensive guns due to the reasons enumerated above.
Avalons are the cannonballs of the 45th century!
Since I think I've made my position clear and I'm starting to feel a little like a parrot, this is going to be my last post on the topic. Range on cap ship guns is probably my biggest pet peeve on space combat sims, which is why this particular topic is so hot for me. You can have a hulking ship that looks impressive but can't touch you until its filling half the screen, or you can have a hulking ship that makes you think of maneuvering even when it first appears on the horizon.
Devs, please please please think about this when you are designing the cap ships.
-Phaser out
How can I say this... it would break my heart to see cap ships in Vendetta that have to close to point blank before getting in range of each other. That was probably my biggest pet peeve with the game X-wing vs. Tie Fighter.
Even in the 19th century, most ships had cannon ranges at least 10x their own ship length. http://www.kipar.org/piratical-resources/pirate-weapons.html Yes, there were blistering point-blank broadsides, but there were also long, drawn out chases, surprise attacks from beyond visual range (watch the opening scene from Master and Commander). A point blank broadside may have been the most devastating, but this was by no means the only tactic. At close range cannons were more effective because they were more accurate, but there was always the long distance volley as two ships closed to engage.
Projectiles could be this for cap ships. It could be possible for the captain of a cap ship to be caught unaware by a volley from another cap ship 10k away, but this would be rare. The maximum effective range of a projectile volley between cap ships would probably be more like 2-3k.
More agile cap ships could maneuver just outside of the HAC's range, using its smaller size and greater maneuverability to its advantage. With projectiles you have uncertainty because of the time lag... a full volley may have an 80% hit rate on a large ship at 3k, but a 30% hit rate on a small cap ship at 2k.
With beam weapons it's 100% accuracy, every time. You are either in range or you are out of range, there's no grey area in between. Cap ship combat becomes an out and out slugfest. Sure I think cap ships should have a variety of weapons, but right now all they have are beam weapons... which I am convinced would not work as a long range offensive guns due to the reasons enumerated above.
Avalons are the cannonballs of the 45th century!
Since I think I've made my position clear and I'm starting to feel a little like a parrot, this is going to be my last post on the topic. Range on cap ship guns is probably my biggest pet peeve on space combat sims, which is why this particular topic is so hot for me. You can have a hulking ship that looks impressive but can't touch you until its filling half the screen, or you can have a hulking ship that makes you think of maneuvering even when it first appears on the horizon.
Devs, please please please think about this when you are designing the cap ships.
-Phaser out
When I'm wrong I'm wrong. (It just might take me a few days to admit it though :)
Most people who participated in the battle had fun. The fact that the cap ships attacked each other added, not detracted from the battle.
I do stick with my original statement by saying the Capital ships have too much armor. Its not a problem when all the cap ships are alive and have turrets, but as soon as they lose turrets or only one cap ship is left the game is basically over. The Itani Cap ship lasted over 2.5 hours until 6 Hive Queens were called in to kill it.
And even taking out turrets was difficult. I fired 40 chaos swarms at one turret from about 900m away and the turret was still alive.
The basically instant kill turret beams did frustrate some people. After awhile players just couldn't afford to fight anymore. I think the average cost, for players, during the last battle was 400k to 800k in new ships. We will have to change our strategy a little and stay close to or in our cap ships until all the turrets are destroyed on the enemy ships. But with the current armor we would still have a hard time destroying an enemy cap ship if our ship also had no turrets.
So my suggestions:
1. Can we have a couple unofficial battles this week? No rules, just a couple of times when players know the cap ship will be spawned. Like Wednesday at 11pm and 11am GMT and Thursday at 11pm GMT. Just so everyone can experience the new changes fiest hand. I'll post the dates and time with your approval.
2. I think the turret armor and the Cap ship armor should be halved from their current levels.
3. Add a variety of weapons to the Cap ships. The super instant kill beams are too much for all the turrets.
4. I think scenario 2 is now obsolete. I don't think players can do any significant damage on the journey to B8. And it would only add time to the overall battle. But I could be wrong about that. But for now I'm sticking with scenario 1 for the next battle.
JB
Most people who participated in the battle had fun. The fact that the cap ships attacked each other added, not detracted from the battle.
I do stick with my original statement by saying the Capital ships have too much armor. Its not a problem when all the cap ships are alive and have turrets, but as soon as they lose turrets or only one cap ship is left the game is basically over. The Itani Cap ship lasted over 2.5 hours until 6 Hive Queens were called in to kill it.
And even taking out turrets was difficult. I fired 40 chaos swarms at one turret from about 900m away and the turret was still alive.
The basically instant kill turret beams did frustrate some people. After awhile players just couldn't afford to fight anymore. I think the average cost, for players, during the last battle was 400k to 800k in new ships. We will have to change our strategy a little and stay close to or in our cap ships until all the turrets are destroyed on the enemy ships. But with the current armor we would still have a hard time destroying an enemy cap ship if our ship also had no turrets.
So my suggestions:
1. Can we have a couple unofficial battles this week? No rules, just a couple of times when players know the cap ship will be spawned. Like Wednesday at 11pm and 11am GMT and Thursday at 11pm GMT. Just so everyone can experience the new changes fiest hand. I'll post the dates and time with your approval.
2. I think the turret armor and the Cap ship armor should be halved from their current levels.
3. Add a variety of weapons to the Cap ships. The super instant kill beams are too much for all the turrets.
4. I think scenario 2 is now obsolete. I don't think players can do any significant damage on the journey to B8. And it would only add time to the overall battle. But I could be wrong about that. But for now I'm sticking with scenario 1 for the next battle.
JB
As I was watching the behavior of the HAC's on saturday, I recalled reading this somewhere and thought that it might help with the AI of the cap ships a bit. It's an excerpt from a document that Miharu is working on. Still in production at the moment, but Miharu was nice enough to let me share this section with everyone.
Close-Range Engagements (Warship-Warship)
Always keep moving, unless you have a reason to not be doing so.
• Even if you’re heading in the same or in a similar direction as the enemy warship, by remaining in motion, you make yourself a more difficult target to shoot.
• Another thing to keep in mind is that you should never move in a straight line for more than ten (10) seconds if your enemy is facing you in any direction. Communication is vital between the gunners and the navigator or captain for this to work.
When attacking, always be aware of the range of your weapons.
• If possible, stay out of your enemy’s range and snipe at them with long-reaching energy weapons or fast-traveling rockets or missiles.
• As you close in on your enemy, fire your weapons sequentially as they come into their individual ranges. Be careful not to overload your reactor, as you will need some energy for the pass-and-retreat.
If you can avoid it, don’t attack the enemy in head-on runs.
•This will likely cause massive damage to the enemy vessel, but in the process it may cause large amounts of damage to your own ship.
• Your enemy, if they are competent enough to be manning the vessel you face, will know what to do in that situation: evade horizontally or vertically, not accept the attack and sit there.
• If you are attacked in this manner, make an attempt to get out of the way, and instruct your gunners to keep their guns trained on the enemy vessel as it approaches and to fire as it comes into range.
As I watched the caps, all they seem to do is spiral into each other until one of them blows up, then start the next death spiral into the next available HAC. I'm sure once players are able to actually steer the ships we won't see this as much but I'm sure the coding for their paths and how they attack each other could be improved a bit. Hope everyone finds the info enlightening, or at least interesting. =)
Close-Range Engagements (Warship-Warship)
Always keep moving, unless you have a reason to not be doing so.
• Even if you’re heading in the same or in a similar direction as the enemy warship, by remaining in motion, you make yourself a more difficult target to shoot.
• Another thing to keep in mind is that you should never move in a straight line for more than ten (10) seconds if your enemy is facing you in any direction. Communication is vital between the gunners and the navigator or captain for this to work.
When attacking, always be aware of the range of your weapons.
• If possible, stay out of your enemy’s range and snipe at them with long-reaching energy weapons or fast-traveling rockets or missiles.
• As you close in on your enemy, fire your weapons sequentially as they come into their individual ranges. Be careful not to overload your reactor, as you will need some energy for the pass-and-retreat.
If you can avoid it, don’t attack the enemy in head-on runs.
•This will likely cause massive damage to the enemy vessel, but in the process it may cause large amounts of damage to your own ship.
• Your enemy, if they are competent enough to be manning the vessel you face, will know what to do in that situation: evade horizontally or vertically, not accept the attack and sit there.
• If you are attacked in this manner, make an attempt to get out of the way, and instruct your gunners to keep their guns trained on the enemy vessel as it approaches and to fire as it comes into range.
As I watched the caps, all they seem to do is spiral into each other until one of them blows up, then start the next death spiral into the next available HAC. I'm sure once players are able to actually steer the ships we won't see this as much but I'm sure the coding for their paths and how they attack each other could be improved a bit. Hope everyone finds the info enlightening, or at least interesting. =)
First off, I did have a lot of fun in this weekend's battle, and a special thanx to Jess who hooked me up with the loot to stay in it...
My thoughts:
1) The Cap ships MUST be more effective carriers. You need to be able to dock and get repaired, and ammo up. I also think you should be able to set the ship as a temp home station, and have access to free, low level ships, i.e. Itani Border Guard Centurions w/ Plasma based guns. It just makes sence that the cap ships would launch reems of fighters to protect it...
2) I'm also way down with the Avalon topedos. Maybe the Cap ships also sell bombers w/ armed with these to higher level pilots? That way the fighters all concentrate on killing bombers, which concentrate on killing turrets and damaging the cap ships... It will encourage more team play too, which was the main thing i felt was missing from the battle.
3) Turrets: 2 x Anti Cap Ship weapons - whether they be beams, or projectiles or whatever. Max range about 5k, accurate at about 2.5 - the idea of having the strategy resemble 1800's Navel warfare is right on... they should also glow when charging;
10 (or so) x Anti fighter/bomber turrets. I'm not high level enough to know the various strengths and weakeness of the better weapons, but maybe a Gatling/missle combo and a kill beam/charged particle combo. This way both strafing fighters and missle launching ships will have to be weary of these turrets...
4) Turret repair - If you can repair a fighter in space w/ an L sized weapon, then these massive ships shouuld have serious damage control and repair capailities. This will keep them from becoming permenantly disabled, and keep the fights going longer. If you knock a turret out, it's only for a set, albiet long (5-10 minutes) time.
5) More cap ship targetable areas - this goes along with the regen idea, but you should be able to knock out a ships engines, or sensors (disableing auto targeting for all turrets!), etc. This will disable some aspect of the ships capabilities, but again, only for a time.
Think about it - a damaged cap ship launches a special strike force of 5 fighters and 3 bombers, who head for the enemy cap ship's engines - they disable them just long enough to let their cap ship slip out of range from the enemy cap, giving enough time to repair the turrets and become competitive in battle... This may drag things out, but it leaves a lot more room for strategy and rewards teams that cooperate.
That's what I wanted to see - squads heading out of the cap ship's docking bay on targeted missions, being intercepted by enemy fighters - all in the 2-4km of space between the 2 cap ships. If fighters occasionally get taken out by mega-turret fire, tough luck!
My 2 cents!
My thoughts:
1) The Cap ships MUST be more effective carriers. You need to be able to dock and get repaired, and ammo up. I also think you should be able to set the ship as a temp home station, and have access to free, low level ships, i.e. Itani Border Guard Centurions w/ Plasma based guns. It just makes sence that the cap ships would launch reems of fighters to protect it...
2) I'm also way down with the Avalon topedos. Maybe the Cap ships also sell bombers w/ armed with these to higher level pilots? That way the fighters all concentrate on killing bombers, which concentrate on killing turrets and damaging the cap ships... It will encourage more team play too, which was the main thing i felt was missing from the battle.
3) Turrets: 2 x Anti Cap Ship weapons - whether they be beams, or projectiles or whatever. Max range about 5k, accurate at about 2.5 - the idea of having the strategy resemble 1800's Navel warfare is right on... they should also glow when charging;
10 (or so) x Anti fighter/bomber turrets. I'm not high level enough to know the various strengths and weakeness of the better weapons, but maybe a Gatling/missle combo and a kill beam/charged particle combo. This way both strafing fighters and missle launching ships will have to be weary of these turrets...
4) Turret repair - If you can repair a fighter in space w/ an L sized weapon, then these massive ships shouuld have serious damage control and repair capailities. This will keep them from becoming permenantly disabled, and keep the fights going longer. If you knock a turret out, it's only for a set, albiet long (5-10 minutes) time.
5) More cap ship targetable areas - this goes along with the regen idea, but you should be able to knock out a ships engines, or sensors (disableing auto targeting for all turrets!), etc. This will disable some aspect of the ships capabilities, but again, only for a time.
Think about it - a damaged cap ship launches a special strike force of 5 fighters and 3 bombers, who head for the enemy cap ship's engines - they disable them just long enough to let their cap ship slip out of range from the enemy cap, giving enough time to repair the turrets and become competitive in battle... This may drag things out, but it leaves a lot more room for strategy and rewards teams that cooperate.
That's what I wanted to see - squads heading out of the cap ship's docking bay on targeted missions, being intercepted by enemy fighters - all in the 2-4km of space between the 2 cap ships. If fighters occasionally get taken out by mega-turret fire, tough luck!
My 2 cents!
I like a lot of what you suggested chaoswarriorx, especially the regen/repair , and the "more targetable areas".
"If fighters occasionally get taken out by mega-turret fire, tough luck!"
I don't have a problem with this either, but as it was with the current beam cannons, fighters are useless, and you pretty much needed to either be IN a turret already before the battle started, or you had to fly a bomber to ever attempt to try and attack one of the HACs. The beam cannons are just too accurate and strong to try a docking manuver with the HAC since they are constantly moving you'd just get picked off in 5 sec. since the HACs have an affinity for humping each other.
"If fighters occasionally get taken out by mega-turret fire, tough luck!"
I don't have a problem with this either, but as it was with the current beam cannons, fighters are useless, and you pretty much needed to either be IN a turret already before the battle started, or you had to fly a bomber to ever attempt to try and attack one of the HACs. The beam cannons are just too accurate and strong to try a docking manuver with the HAC since they are constantly moving you'd just get picked off in 5 sec. since the HACs have an affinity for humping each other.
Modern Carriers have seperated the landing strip(s) and launching strip(s). The current docking port makes for a great launching port. If we could just have a better positioned docking port. Better docking would give a large advantage to the defending fighters, and the caps automated defences would be less of an issue.
It seams like you would not want the caps doing to many things the players would have fun doing.
I already see where a player needs to pick his ship for a specific role. Repairing, bombing, aircap, air superiority, etc...
I noticed the caps violating a fundamental three combatant stratigy: When any two combatants' combined force approaches equality with the third's, they will both attack the third combatant (, so that the third combatant isn't so strong that he can take on both of them and win).
It seams like you would not want the caps doing to many things the players would have fun doing.
I already see where a player needs to pick his ship for a specific role. Repairing, bombing, aircap, air superiority, etc...
I noticed the caps violating a fundamental three combatant stratigy: When any two combatants' combined force approaches equality with the third's, they will both attack the third combatant (, so that the third combatant isn't so strong that he can take on both of them and win).