Do SuperFortresses need to be made more useful or interesting?

[Coppermantis]

I put, "Nothing needs to change", because I think the Fortress concept itself is currently broken.  I think we can come up with something a lot more interesting and intuitive than the current method of "obliterate anything but bombers", so I'm holding off any votes on Fortress-related things until something is done about that.

I might start a thread about that soon(TM).

Way ahead of you...sort of: http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=4777

It's interesting to note that even Keith has expressed dissatisfaction with the current fortress model.

A long time ago, fortresses used to be able to load up units into themselves, however, it didn't really do anything except protect those units, and no one really used them. So it was removed. I wonder if something more interesting could of been done with that concept, especially now that we do have mechanics that alter a unit based on how much they are "transporting" (see carriers), or do something with what they are transporting (Mk. II transports).

Perhaps we could allow Superfortresses to load units into themselves but also have said units be able to shoot out as well (maybe with reduced damage or otherwise.)

[Shrugging Khan]

So...we let SFs project a force field with damage reduction for protected units?

[LaughingThesaurus]

I still vote to completely overhaul and go completely overboard on Superfortresses. Why? Because you only get one and they cost 8 million of each resource (last I checked). The alternative ideas I'm seeing, the small buff or load units in or only get drones ideas, those are just little buffs to the superfortress to bring it in line with other fortresses.
The Superfortress is a SUPERfortress. Is there a reason to not make it absurdly super?

[Winge]

I put, "Nothing needs to change", because I think the Fortress concept itself is currently broken.  I think we can come up with something a lot more interesting and intuitive than the current method of "obliterate anything but bombers", so I'm holding off any votes on Fortress-related things until something is done about that.

I might start a thread about that soon(TM).

I didn't vote, but I'm with you on this one, Wingflier.  I look forward to seeing what you come up with.  Here are my thoughts:

I feel that the role of the fortress should be against heavier ships--that seems to be the weak link in the 'vanilla' defenses.  I'm thinking Fortresses base damage should be reduced with bonuses along the lines of 0.2 Polycrystal, 0.5 Artillery, 2 Heavy, 2 Ultra-Heavy, 2 Command-Grade.  That way, Fortresses would be less effective against ships in general, to keep the response from being completely binary.  The Fortress would not do as well against Bombers and Artillery, which makes sense.  Heavy and Ultra-Heavy naturally fall into that role.  And Command-Grade is a much-needed bonus for defense, especially since most turrets have a multiplier of 0.1 Command-Grade (the only exception I know of is the HBC, which doesn't have multipliers).  Obviously, these numbers will most likely need tweaking by someone better at balance than I am.  I could also see giving Fortresses Command-Grade armor--it fits lore well and makes it so that a Fortress is a little bit tougher defensively.

Also, Fortresses should be immune to Radar Dampening.  I took out multiple Superfortresses in a FS game using Space Planes...if it wasn't for Guards/Ion Cannons, I wouldn't have lost one Plane.  That's just plain silly.   

The Superfortress could get a few other perks for its cost and being a Mark V unit--increased range, higher-than-expected stats, better multiplers, or a new ability of some sort.

[TechSY730]

I still vote to completely overhaul and go completely overboard on Superfortresses. Why? Because you only get one and they cost 8 million of each resource (last I checked). The alternative ideas I'm seeing, the small buff or load units in or only get drones ideas, those are just little buffs to the superfortress to bring it in line with other fortresses.
The Superfortress is a SUPERfortress. Is there a reason to not make it absurdly super?

Bring it in line with 2.5x power of a theoretical MK. V fortress with a cap of 1 (aka, 5 * 2.5 * power of a cap of Mk. I fortresses)?

[Wingflier]

If you do that, Wingflier, would you mind including some of my ideas for a way to make Fortresses more interesting, like, an extremely heavy front for attacks with all the amenities built in? Seems like that'd be unique enough if Fortresses themselves need an overhaul.

I'm planning to do it in the same way I did the Triangle discussion; in 3 parts:

1. Community input to see if people are interested enough in the concept.
2. Community brainstorming for ideas in which no negative criticisms are allowed.
3. Community poll in which all the most popular ideas are presented and people can vote (and at this point, criticism is allowed).

So everyone will have the opportunity to put their ideas into the second thread like last time, don't worry.

[LordSloth]

I'm looking forward to it, really. We've already got more ideas than I started out with, and a comprehensive approach to that should be great, since I wanted more than just my simple two original ideas to go on a ticket somewhere.

Found out a little bit about the actual power of the SuperFort, why people feel it's weak, and etcetera.

I would have actually changed my own original vote by now, but I don't see the point as long as new ideas keep coming in.

[True-Chaos]

What about instead of buffing the Superfort as a Mark V Fort - Redesign it as a Mark II Modular fort?

[Martyn van Buren]

I quite like that last idea. Superforts are rare enough I think it would be okay to let them bring an occasiona modular fort into the base game (or are they Zenith Remnant-only?).  And in the rare case that a player builds one it would be nice if it could be tailored to the game.

[Fluffiest]

I'd strongly recommend waiting to see how the "State of Fortresses" discussion pans out before deciding what changes we're making to SuperFortresses. For now, I think a good place for the SuperFortress is with equivalent DPS to an entire cap of theoretical MK V fortresses, but with higher rate of fire (or more shots per volley) and lower damage per shot to mitigate overkill. It is a SuperFortress, after all.

Of course, if Fortresses end up being something completely different - a way to shield turrets without reducing their damage, or a staging post for masses of fighter drones - the SuperFortress will have to be balanced accordingly.