Discussion about Different Playstyles

[keith.lamothe]

I said it was in, not the manifesto, of course.

Oh, right, I suppose I could actually read

[Martyn van Buren]

I like Hearteater's detachments idea; Mantis it? I remember Chris talking somewhere in the AVWW boards about too much randomness reducing variety because everything trends towards the average outcome, and I feel like AI defenses have a bit of this going on right now. Perhaps the choices could be influenced by guard post types, so they're more likely to get something complementary?

[Minotaar]

I like Hearteater's detachments idea; Mantis it? I remember Chris talking somewhere in the AVWW boards about too much randomness reducing variety because everything trends towards the average outcome, and I feel like AI defenses have a bit of this going on right now. Perhaps the choices could be influenced by guard post types, so they're more likely to get something complementary?

Yeah, I mean it makes sense to have Fighters at Short Range guardposts and Frigates on Missile Guardposts and stuff like that. But the reinforcements in general and the guardposts' own stats need a closer look before that, I think.

By buffing Fighters you are countering Bombers.  Secondly, Fighters have such crappy multipliers against most things that even tripling their damage would only put them in line with where Bombers currently are now in terms of usefulness. 

Please consider that the Fighter is 1/4 of a price of a Bomber or a Frigate and making them equal in usefulness would indeed result in them being overpowered.

[KDR_11k]

I recall fighters being sold as anti-starship units in 3.0 due to higher DPS. Which of the basic units has a bonus against Neutron (Zenith and Spire starships)? Raids and Leeches are Ultra-Light, that's fighter territory, right?

Also I agree with Keith that the 0.05x multiplier vs Polycrystal on the fortress is utter BS, I don't think the counter relationships should be that strong. The fort probably needs a nerf to its power against non-bombers along with increased anti-bomber damage, it shouldn't be a "send only bombers" situation since that's just brainless and boring (seriously, all you can do against forts is send the bombers alone, if the bombers die before the fort does you need to send a second wave but you simply cannot reinforce the bombers in any way). Maybe it could have a damage penalty vs structural so if you've got shields at hand you can use those to help with the assault. Just do SOMETHING to make forts less of a single approach situation. Bombers already get dibs on shielded locations.

[Diazo]

Oops, I realize I left one very important detail out of my argument about fighters not being overpowered.

I consider Golems and Guardians and so on to be part of the "Heavy Defenses" that bombers are supposed to be good against.

It is the other hundreds of ships in the system (the fleet ships) that fighters are supposed to be good against.

Except that instead of staying in the system and fighting there, players bait those AI controlled fleet ships back to their own worlds where the turrets kill them hence my position of fighters being good at their role, but turrets being better.

My fix for this would be to change bombers, not fighters. Decrease a bombers base damage but increase its attack multipliers so against stuff like Heavy or Command Grade its DPS stays the same but its damage is no longer as good against the AI controlled fleet ships so you have incentive to bring fighters along to keep your bombers alive to reach their target.

Except that's unbalanced the other way with how many units in the game bombers have a bonus against.

I would support fighters attack multipliers increasing and maybe getting one more type of attack multiplier but I don't feel that fighters need a global buff. I'm still of the position that fighters are good for their role, it's just turrets are better so the perception that "fighters are weak" exists.

D.

[Hearteater]

Yeah, I mean it makes sense to have Fighters at Short Range guardposts and Frigates on Missile Guardposts and stuff like that. But the reinforcements in general and the guardposts' own stats need a closer look before that, I think.

I probably wouldn't want Detachments limited in this fashion.  Short Range Guard Posts with short range ships is interesting, but a pile of long range ships would also be interesting.  I've thrown the idea up on Mantis now.

[Wingflier]

Oops, I realize I left one very important detail out of my argument about fighters not being overpowered.

I consider Golems and Guardians and so on to be part of the "Heavy Defenses" that bombers are supposed to be good against.

It is the other hundreds of ships in the system (the fleet ships) that fighters are supposed to be good against.

And they're not...at least no more than Bombers are.

Please consider that the Fighter is 1/4 of a price of a Bomber or a Frigate and making them equal in usefulness would indeed result in them being overpowered.

Cost is basically irrelevant with the current economic mechanics (from my experience) after the early game.  The ship with more damage and staying power is going to be the superior ship.  If you gave Fighters better bonuses (or more raw damage), then yes, this argument would apply.  Unfortunately they're glorified damage sponges right now except against bombers and a few rare types.

Even if Fighters WERE overpowered, explained to me how this is a negative thing for the game.  Instantly, Bombers become nerfed by proxy.  Frigates become buffed by proxy.  And Fighter waves are actually a challenge.  In addition, you've got a quick, all-purpose ship good for most situations, but still easily destroyed by Guardians, Fortresses, Frigates, and many other threats.

To quote the Wiki:  http://arcengames.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=Fighter

How to counter when in the AI fleet

Just take your time and count your lucky stars that the AI isn't sending something more dangerous.

I rest my case.

[chemical_art]

Bombers used to have lower base attack but greater multiplyers. It didn't solve anything at least in that bombers were the most favored. Fighters still have the best base dps, the best base health, and the best cost. They are the best general purpose ships in all ways.

Making fighters stronger won't make bombers any less useful. You. Still. Use. Them. For. They. Do. Most. Damage. (Against threatening things to the blob)

With fighters and bombers being the same speed anyway, there is no reason not to send them together. If only so the fighters absorb some damage and provide cover for bombers.

Cost is relevant. I'll repeat this like a record as long as it remains true. Bump up difficulty.

[Wingflier]

Bombers used to have lower base attack but greater multiplyers. It didn't solve anything at least in that bombers were the most favored. Fighters still have the best base dps, the best base health, and the best cost. They are the best general purpose ships in all ways.

All of this is true on paper, but not in practice.

Fighters do about 25% more than Bombers as far as base damage is concerned, but Bombers have 6x multipliers against Heavy, Ultra-Heavy, Structural, Artillery, and Command-Grade which makes their average DPS (considering the targets you usually encounter) skyrocket above Fighters.

Saying Fighters have the best DPS of all the Triangle ships because of their raw damage is like saying your car is the fastest in the world because it has the best tires.  The multipliers are what really matters in the current damage system - with the exception of a few ships.

Fighters are only all-purpose in the fact that they are meat shields for the rest of your fleet.

Making fighters stronger won't make bombers any less useful. You. Still. Use. Them. For. They. Do. Most. Damage. (Against threatening things to the blob)

No. They. Don't.

Aside from Bombers, the things Fighters have bonuses for (Medium and Close Combat) Are. Not. A. Threat. To. You.  You. Don't. Need. A. Bonus. To. Fight. Those. Weak. Ass. Ships.

With fighters and bombers being the same speed anyway, there is no reason not to send them together. If only so the fighters absorb some damage and provide cover for bombers.

Many people have already agreed (including Keith if I read that correctly) that the Bomber speed should be nerfed (and Fighters possibly buffed).  Yes, we understand that Fighters are a great meat shield.  Hurrah.

Cost is relevant. I'll repeat this like a record as long as it remains true. Bump up difficulty.

Even if cost is relevant, this is such a non-sequitir.  Am I actually going to unlock Fighter MKIVs instead of Bomber MKIVs because they go easier on my resources?  No, nobody would do that because even with their ease of replacement, Fighters can't accomplish anything on offense (or defense) without Bombers.  Until Fighters become worth unlocking to MKIV just as often as Bombers, they are undeniably underpowered.

Let's do a little test.  You want to talk about how high the DPS of Fighters is?  Let's see if your theory is correct.  If Fighters have such a high DPS, they should be getting a large number of the total kills right?  So at the end of every game, we (as a community) should test and see how many kills the Fighters got, vs. how many kills the Bombers got, then take an average.

I think we all know how that's going to turn out already.

[Draco18s]

Making fighters stronger won't make bombers any less useful. You. Still. Use. Them. For. They. Do. Most. Damage. (Against threatening things to the blob)

No. They. Don't.

Aside from Bombers, the things Fighters have bonuses for (Medium and Close Combat) Are. Not. A. Threat. To. You.  You. Don't. Need. A. Bonus. To. Fight. Those. Weak. Ass. Ships.

I think we've been over this:

Bombers are king because you need their bonuses.

Tweaking all of the other numbers isn't going to change this fact.

[Wingflier]

Unless we tweaked the Bombers too...

Seems simple enough to me.  Tweak the Bombers (reduce their multipliers from 6 to 3), then buff the raw Fighter damage to compensate.  Total fleet DPS doesn't go down, it's just distributed more evenly.  Frigates are buffed indirectly because Fighters become more useful (for both you and the AI).

[chemical_art]

Was writing, getting ninja'ed

The solution is to downgrade bomber multiplyers then. Buffing fighting won't stop the bombers, so rather then an arms race drop the bombers.

If you did that, you'd also perhaps understand why I actually choose III and IV fighters over bombers. Because I want overall fleet ships, not bombers. If I can send them out 4x as rapidly.

Since throwing out RTS convention is the rage these days, a rts player never leaves money in the bank for long. If you can send out 4x as many units that are stronger in many situations and much tougher, they are better then the other more frail unit that is better against big things but terrible elsewise and unable to attack anything else while easily being ripped apart.

[Draco18s]

And now you have to tweak every other structure the bomber is the only unit that can be used against.

I.e. Fortresses.

By halving bomber damage against them, you've effectively doubled their health.

You also have to consider the fighter vs. the bomber when upping the fighter base damage (or polycrystal multiplier).

Which in turn causes another series of evaluations about things that should "stay relatively the same."  And so on and so on.

[Wingflier]

Meh Fortresses need to be looked at anyway.  Consider it a blessing.

[Hearteater]

Let's do a little test.  You want to talk about how high the DPS of Fighters is?  Let's see if your theory is correct.  If Fighters have such a high DPS, they should be getting a large number of the total kills right?  So at the end of every game, we (as a community) should test and see how many kills the Fighters got, vs. how many kills the Bombers got, then take an average.

I think we all know how that's going to turn out already.

You'd be surprised.  Current game I have 12 planets, 5ish hours in, and the numbers are by Mark:
Bombers: 691 + 715 + 10
Fighters: 934 + 519 + 262

I have Fighter Mark III unlocked, but not Bomber Mark III.   I unlocked Mark II Fighters and Bombers at the same time.  The Mark III Bomber kills come from reclaimed ships.  So if we throw out the Mark III values, we get:
Bombers: 1406
Fighters: 1453