Author Topic: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships  (Read 5046 times)

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,558
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #30 on: April 16, 2013, 03:37:36 PM »
About the high cap stuff, I wonder if the "anti-low cap" was brought into balance, specifically things like the OMD (which needs help) and the anti-starship arachnid guard post (which I'm on the fence about), and was seeded more or less as frequently as the "anti-high cap" stuff. (Not the OMD though, as it is a capturable, though I guess it's base spawn rate could go up a bit, or a somewhat less powerful but not capturable "look-alike" is made and that is given AI eye levels of spawn rate), then maybe that will help out high cap stuff in cases. Also, I wonder if something like a "core anti-starship arachnid guard post" would be a good idea, and maybe a brutal pick version of that as well. (maybe the brutal pick version could have the OMD's range).

This would hopefully make some planets and possibly even homeworlds more favorable for high-cap ships at times.

Special care should be taken to make the two spawning together very rare though. like, say, if the chance of an "anti-low" spawning on a planet is 1/4, and the "anti-high" spawning on a planet is 1/4, then the chance of both spawning together should not be 1/4 * 1/4 = 1/16 (aka, they should not be independent picks) but more like (1/4 * 1/4)^(1.5) = (1/16)^(1.5) = 1/64). Normally, I would be all for statistical independence. But given that the two together would result in much, MUCH more difficulty than the difficulty of just one of them * 2 would be, I can see a such a sharp decrease of "co-spawning" odds.


In any case, the OMD needs some serious help anyways.

Offline LordSloth

  • Sr. Member Mark III
  • ****
  • Posts: 430
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #31 on: April 16, 2013, 04:47:13 PM »
Silly half-thought out idea:

Replace a quarter of the "AI Eyes" with "AI Fists". Only a quarter because Eye variety allows it's own counters. These "AI Fists" would have "Eye" levels of health and be mobile. Think Hunter-Killer crossed with Guardian, but completely unable to leave their home system. They would have limited attack range, barely outpace Heavy Bomber Starships, and have only a single target high damage attack. Maybe even make it a ram that doesn't self-destruct, a gigantic cutlass. They'd have significant wasted overkill on swarmer types, put a dent in regular fleets, and decimate low cap ships. They would have Eye levels of health, be immune to repair, and unlike eyes, they would lose a percentage of their health for each guard post that popped, or pop with the command station. Starship and low-cap focused players could operate in these systems with decoys at the opposite wormhole, or cloaker starships.

Anyways, just a little brainstorm while I recover from hauling stuff in Florida weather. I don't really have any clearly thought out reasons for any of the details I proposed, but just throwing out the idea as maybe an alternate direction, especially since a starship combat force is so much more accessible now from a K perspective.

Alternately, make it slower - and give it a repair beam in case you don't finish off a nearby guardpost.

Like an arachnid one-system patrol. Or, there would be an "Interplanetary Defender Post", and this guardian would travel between all adjacent systems kind of like a fleet version of an interplanetary munitions booster.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 04:55:45 PM by LordSloth »

Offline Toranth

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,241
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #32 on: April 16, 2013, 04:55:44 PM »
In any case, the OMD needs some serious help anyways.
OMD: 1,800,000 Damage every 10 seconds
Arachnid GP:  10,000,000 * Mk damage every 5 seconds.

Plasma, Leech, Flagship Starships:  10,000,000 HP * Mk
Bomber: 18,000,000 * Mk
Spire:  24,000,000 * Mk
Zenith:  36,000,000 * Mk
Raid:  2,000,000 * Mk
Riot:  1,800,000 * Mk


Yeah, OMD should do about 20 times as much damage per shot.  In fact, considering it's a rare thing (Core and AI HW usually), it should be much nastier than the Arachnid.

Offline Radiant Phoenix

  • Sr. Member Mark II
  • ****
  • Posts: 362
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #33 on: April 16, 2013, 05:43:55 PM »
barely outpace Heavy Bomber Starships
You do realize that Heavy Bomber starships are actually really fast, right? 110 speed vs a Fighter's 84 and a Bomber's 72?

Offline LordSloth

  • Sr. Member Mark III
  • ****
  • Posts: 430
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #34 on: April 16, 2013, 05:51:44 PM »
Yep. A theoretical super guardian would have speed slightly faster than Heavy Bomber Starships so that: 1). Bombers would still have a chance to run away if the guardian was decoyed elsewhere 2). if the guardian caught up, they'd be doomed. In practice, this might not give enough time for anything to be done, but as I said, this is only a brainstorm, not an idea that has undergone careful review.

Alternate variant: Enforcer Maw, similar to a starship dissambler guardian, but only functions on fleetships, with a preference for low-cap ships. This ship would have considerably lower speed, none of the invulnerability, and you'd be able to rescue your ships.

Halfbaked idea #3, nerf engine health on low cap fleetships, bring starship engine health to a median 50,000, buff engine health on high cap ships, give AI more stationary sources of engine damage.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 05:53:15 PM by LordSloth »

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #35 on: April 16, 2013, 06:11:16 PM »
I do think a guardian that really, really focuses on large targets would be nic-

Oh! Why not buff the artillery guardian? It already is supposed to do this.
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #36 on: April 16, 2013, 06:12:07 PM »
Oh! Why not buff the artillery guardian? It already is supposed to do this.
This is the person that gave us H/Ks in exos, so I suppose I should not be surprised.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,558
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #37 on: April 16, 2013, 06:17:56 PM »
I do think a guardian that really, really focuses on large targets would be nic-

Oh! Why not buff the artillery guardian? It already is supposed to do this.

I was thinking of something more along the lines of a "semi-super weapon" like AI eyes are, except geared around countering small numbers of very tough stuff instead of large numbers of weaker stuff. The rarity of them would thus be similar to that of AI eyes (or possibly even cut AI eye spawning rate in half, and give this new structure that same, now reduced, spawn rate).

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #38 on: April 16, 2013, 06:27:03 PM »
Well, there's always implosion guardians.

The Imploding Eye!

Ok, not really.
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #39 on: April 16, 2013, 06:31:01 PM »
Well, there's always implosion guardians.

The Imploding Eye!

Ok, not really.

But it could work!

If the AI detects its own ships outnumber the enemy by 5 times the amount, it launches a dozen high powered lasers every 30 seconds. It causes massive damage. The theory being the AI is trying to eliminate the threat so it doesn't waste reinforcements.

[half way serious idea]
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline chemical_art

  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Fabulous
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #40 on: April 16, 2013, 06:32:21 PM »
Oh! Why not buff the artillery guardian? It already is supposed to do this.
This is the person that gave us H/Ks in exos, so I suppose I should not be surprised.

My other idea was a new guardian, the siege guardian, which fires every 30 seconds, fires a plasma siege like projectile, and hits 1 * MK million damage and lesser damage to very nearby targets?
Life is short. Have fun.

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #41 on: April 16, 2013, 06:32:31 PM »
It's funny how "Eye" in this game means "The AI is Unimpressed with your current playstyle and insists that you temporarily use a different one".
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!

Offline Radiant Phoenix

  • Sr. Member Mark II
  • ****
  • Posts: 362
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #42 on: April 16, 2013, 07:13:41 PM »
I was thinking of something more along the lines of a "semi-super weapon" like AI eyes are, except geared around countering small numbers of very tough stuff instead of large numbers of weaker stuff. The rarity of them would thus be similar to that of AI eyes (or possibly even cut AI eye spawning rate in half, and give this new structure that same, now reduced, spawn rate).
Well, let's look at our constraints:
  • It has to be able to hit a Tackle Drone Launcher (speed 76)
  • It has to be able to be caught by a Space Tank (speed 44)
Thus, we know it has to be slower than its opposition, so it has to be a long-range ship. Possibly even stationary.

  • It has to be able to hit a Zenith Bombard (range 33000, immunity to snipers)
  • It has to be able to kill a Spire Railcluster (3.3 million HP, immunity to insta-kill)
  • It shouldn't slaughter superweapons too easily (Spire Frigate: 5 million HP, immunity to nuclear weapons)
  • It shouldn't be good against Space Tanks (0.1 million HP, cap = 96)
  • It should be good against Zenith Bombards (0.4 million HP, cap = 24)
My suggestion:
  • The "Fist" should be a stationary structure
  • It should have a large range like an Ion cannon
  • It should fires a"Targeted Nuclear Pulse Cannon": a gun that fires single-target nuclear attacks. (i.e., each shot insta-kills anything that's not immune to nukes -- even low-cap ships aren't immune to that)
  • This gun should use special logic so that blowing up a transport doesn't kill all the high-cap ships in it.
  • It should have radar dampening so it gets some time to pick off your Railclusters
  • It shouldn't fire too fast, or too many shots, because high-cap ships aren't immune to nukes either
It's good against low-cap bonus ships because each "1 ship" is worth more.
It doesn't crush superweapons because they're immune to nukes[1].

---

But, honestly, I prefer this:
  • Make swarmers very cheap -- we know this works because Zenith Autobombs are (or at least were, back in 6.009) very good
  • Make low cap ships generally slower (think 50-60 speed), and high-cap ships generally faster (think 80-90)
  • Make sure munitions boosters can boost your whole fleet of high-cap ships
---

[1]: Modules should be made immune to nuclear explosions if their parent ship is.


My other idea was a new guardian, the siege guardian, which fires every 30 seconds, fires a plasma siege like projectile, and hits 1 * MK million damage and lesser damage to very nearby targets?

That doesn't work because splash damage is good against high-cap ships.

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,558
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #43 on: April 16, 2013, 07:26:12 PM »
Why not both? Why not that sort of "sliding scale" for balance goals for low-cap vs high-cap ships, and introduce a new "inverse" of AI eyes?


Also, instead of a new "insta kill" mechanic, why not something of crazy, CRAZY high damage. Like with max armor peircing and just one point of damage away of being able to oneshot a mothership. Done, no special logic needed.
If you are worried about superweapon stuff, I guess you could give it artillery ammo, so things immune to artillery ammo can still face it, but it can still one-shot most things because immunity of artillery ammo is extremely rare. (Notably, most starships are immune to nukes, which is one of the staples of low-cap ship type play)
Should have immunity to radar dampening and immunity to attack boosts (not that lack of an attack boost really holds it back, but still, it's the principle of the thing)

Offline LordSloth

  • Sr. Member Mark III
  • ****
  • Posts: 430
Re: (Bonus Ships) Comparing Swarmers to Pseudo-Starships
« Reply #44 on: April 16, 2013, 07:43:29 PM »
Personally, I'm going for the 'scattergun' style of ideas, in the hopes that I inspire someone with a significantly better understanding of the gameplay than I possess.

But aside from how unfortunately awful my 'fist' name is - unfortunate euphemisms waiting to jump on the scene - why just one variety/form of this?* It's not like we have one type of AI Eye, some of which can be completely ignored by ships with the right type of immunity. There's room for a slow, long-ranged enemy and a fast, short-ranged enemy, right? If they have some giant weaknesses to some starships and low-caps, and unusually good against other starships and low-caps, why that's all for the better, in theory.

*yes, reality of development costs and art assets. But I'm no good judge of this for a variety of factors, so I'll leave that analysis up to devs, and not be disappointed if my ideas are too impractical.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 07:50:29 PM by LordSloth »