Bombers and command-grade hulls

[Bognor]

This probably puts me in the minority, but so far I've tried to avoid researching higher marks of triangle ships whenever practical.  Instead, I wait to see if I can acquire bonus fleet ships with overlapping roles and upgrade those instead.  My reasoning is that (1) I can get Mark III & IV ships without spending 2500 knowledge on the Mark II upgrade; and (2) bonus fleet ships are intended to be 30-50% more powerful than triangle ships.   I'd imagine the devs would be pleased I've chosen this strategy, as maximising variety is one of the design goals. 

But something just happened that may forever change my plans.

*MINOR SPOILERS AHEAD*

In the first exo-wave of a 9/9 2-homeworld game with Golems (hard) and Spirecraft (hard), I met my first Hunter/Killer.  Part of what makes these beasts so nasty is their command-grade hull type.  This renders them near-immune to most turrets (all but heavy beam cannons get a 0.1x damage multiplier), plus there are literally NO starships or bonus fleet ships that get a bonus against command-grade hulls.  The only ship I've found that does is the humble Bomber.

I think that in any game with serious exo-waves, H/Ks will be one of the more likely ways I could lose.  This means I'm all but certain to research higher marks of bombers, rather than hold out to see whether Space tanks/Chameleons/Electric bombers/Raiders/Bombards become available. 

So, I'm wondering whether there's any special reason no bonus fleet ships get a bonus against command-grade hulls?  I ask because giving a triangle ship a niche that no bonus ship can meet, and therefore encouraging players to always upgrade a particular triangle ship at the expense of upgrading a bonus fleet ship, seems contrary to the design goal of maximising variety.

[Diazo]

My take on it is that the triangle ships are your bread and butter units. They are nothing special, the bonus ship types are better then them in some way but when you are reaching for a specific role, one of the triangle ships will always cover your needs so you don't get stuck with no unit available to fill the role you are looking for.

In this case, it just so happens that there is no bonus ship with the "blow up command grade hulls" role, so you reach for the bomber, the triangle ship that covers that role.

The bonus ship types are there to provide variety and give you different options, they are not meant to be used instead of the triangle ships.

That's why you only get one bonus ship to start, you *have* to use the triangle ships aswell, you can't use them instead.

From your post it sounds like you are trying multi-HW with multiple bonus ship types, but being able to start with more then one homeworld is actually quite new in terms of the life of the game, the design choice you are talking about was made way back when you could only start with one homeworld.

(I assume anyway, I don't have a telepathic link to the devs or anything.)

D.

[keith.lamothe]

I believe polarizers, IREs, and vultures can all chip in pretty well against H/Ks, but yes, the fact that they still have the hull-type they were given when they were purely an "we're intentionally messing with the player because they chokepointed too much" tends to make them extra brutal.  I've thought of just making them heavy or ultra-heavy like other things of that sort, or possibly neutron just to make the anti-exotic stuff more useful.  And it's been suggested to add a new "really good against most things" hull type but I don't think that's necessary (more hull types just makes the system more complex).

[TechSY730]

I believe polarizers, IREs, and vultures can all chip in pretty well against H/Ks, but yes, the fact that they still have the hull-type they were given when they were purely an "we're intentionally messing with the player because they chokepointed too much" tends to make them extra brutal.  I've thought of just making them heavy or ultra-heavy like other things of that sort, or possibly neutron just to make the anti-exotic stuff more useful.  And it's been suggested to add a new "really good against most things" hull type but I don't think that's necessary (more hull types just makes the system more complex).

I don't know if adding a new hull type would be so bad for this case. In my view of the new hull type, it would basically be a copy of command grade hull except nothing gets a severe penalty against it (a moderate penalty, maybe, but not severe). However, almost nothing would get a bonus against it either, just like command grade hull now. This way, they can remain durable, but still allow things like turrets and rams to do something resembling damage.
And it would have a VERY limited distribution, astro trains, hunter killers, and motherships. That would be it.
This wouldn't fix what the OP pointed out though, that pretty much only bombers would have a bonus against it.

See http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/view.php?id=6798#c21281

[Nodor]

I actually think the anti-bonus is the point.

And in the 7-8 range, so far, they feel balanced.  Tough as nails, but balanced.

[Bognor]

Thanks all for the sensible comments.

Techsy, what you suggest might be more elegantly accomplished using some variant of the "All Attackers Get Damage Bonus Against This 10x" mechanic that Zenith Mirrors have.  This seems to override the hull type bonus, based on the data in the reference tab (eg Frigates do 10x, not 60x, their base damage).  I'd rather H/Ks and Motherships have different hull types to each other for variety's sake.

[Wanderer]

I actually think the anti-bonus is the point.

And in the 7-8 range, so far, they feel balanced.  Tough as nails, but balanced.

I believe the anti-bonus is actually because there are particular guardposts with command-grade armor and this was to discourage beach-heading certain worlds.  I need to double check an AI HW though.

[Nodor]

I actually think the anti-bonus is the point.

And in the 7-8 range, so far, they feel balanced.  Tough as nails, but balanced.

I believe the anti-bonus is actually because there are particular guardposts with command-grade armor and this was to discourage beach-heading certain worlds.  I need to double check an AI HW though.

I was specifically thinking of the anti-bonus on the Fallen Spire high DPS weaponry modules.  It was my understanding that this was designed at the same time as the Hunter/Killers were released into the wild.

My understanding is of course, often flawed.

[Eternaly_Lost]

I actually think the anti-bonus is the point.

And in the 7-8 range, so far, they feel balanced.  Tough as nails, but balanced.

I believe the anti-bonus is actually because there are particular guardposts with command-grade armor and this was to discourage beach-heading certain worlds.  I need to double check an AI HW though.

I was specifically thinking of the anti-bonus on the Fallen Spire high DPS weaponry modules.  It was my understanding that this was designed at the same time as the Hunter/Killers were released into the wild.

My understanding is of course, often flawed.

From what I understand, Hunter/Killers have been in the game for a long time, but it was only Fallen Spire that finally got them a chance to appear more often then once in a blue moon.

Still, I look at the Spire Fleet's Heavy-Beam cannons modules and Sniper Modules 0.1x to command grade and frown, then I see the main gun is several million damage and is not effected, so I don't care as much.

[keith.lamothe]

The anti-command-grade bonuses on FS modules had no intent relating to H/Ks.  H/Ks weren't added to the game as part of exos until over a year after FS was introduced.

[Eternaly_Lost]

The anti-command-grade bonuses on FS modules had no intent relating to H/Ks.  H/Ks weren't added to the game as part of exos until over a year after FS was introduced.

So what is the intent behind those anti-command-grade bonuses?

And I think my statement still stands in a way. I doubt many people had seen a Hunter-killer until they got added to the Fallen Spire Exos, but they did still exist before Fallen Spire right?

[keith.lamothe]

So what is the intent behind those anti-command-grade bonuses?

They were from the turrets they copied.

I doubt many people had seen a Hunter-killer until they got added to the Fallen Spire Exos, but they did still exist before Fallen Spire right?

Only briefly a bit before 5.0, I think, as a counter-chokepoint measure.  But the logic that spawned them was removed and they were not possible to spawn aside from cheats until earlier this years when they were added to exos.

[TechSY730]

So what is the intent behind those anti-command-grade bonuses?

They were from the turrets they copied.

This leads to another question, why do turrets have a severe command-grade penalty? I mean, how often would you try to use an offensive beachhead to try to take out a command station?

I can understand giving them a command-grade penalty, but why is it as severe as it is now?

[chemical_art]

two situations at once:

The hull used to prevent  the greatest targets on offense (command grade hull via command stations, some guard posts) is also used for the greatest defensive threats (H/K's)

Messy.

[keith.lamothe]

Messy.

And you had to wake them up