Author Topic: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)  (Read 12333 times)

Offline PokerChen

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,088
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #15 on: February 19, 2012, 10:38:47 am »
I guess people know what I'm going to be asking for next. :P 1st prize is now going to Paralyzers (Edit: mistake!)
« Last Edit: February 20, 2012, 12:03:19 am by zharmad »

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #16 on: February 19, 2012, 01:46:25 pm »
- Spiders are probably the worst on the list now, with the teleport station in tow.  Very low HP, low engine damage, low range and no combat worth.

Low HP, yes.  Already doubled that for 5.027 while I was converting the Anti-Starship Vs to Spiders.
Low ED, yes.  Already quadrupled that for 5.027 to bring it into the same ballpark as spider turrets (a full cap of Spider Is + a full cap of Spider IIs will now have about a full cap of Spider Turret's EDPS, combined; and so on)

Low Range?  They've all got the same range as a mkI missile frigate; how is that low?  Compared to sniper units, yes, but c'mon ;)

No combat worth?  How so?  A full cap of mkIs does 235k dps against its bonus targets (which include fighters, raid starships, most melee ships, etc).  Only 9 bonus/triangle ship types do more than that in the bonus case, and 3 of those are self-destructing units.  How is that not combat worth?

Really, even with zero ED these would be at least capable in combat.  Their cap-hp was in the eyebot range which was too low, but not entirely inappropriate considering their low e and m+c costs.
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 keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #17 on: February 19, 2012, 01:47:53 pm »
To clarify: my reason for interrogating these assertions about the spider is that in order for me to be able to use the info you give me reliably, I have to make sure we're starting from the same set of facts and reasoning in roughly the same way.  Otherwise we're basically not talking the same language, and I wind up buffing/nerfing stuff that doesn't need it :)
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: 4,570
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #18 on: February 19, 2012, 02:55:56 pm »
Impulse emitters and polarizers suffer from the same problem. Their minimum damage is WAY too low.

For example, polarizers have a base damage of like 200 or something (on medium caps) the problem is that this is also their minimum damage (what they do vs. targets with 0 armor)
This is WAY too small.

I say make the balance the impulse reactors and the polarizers such that they do 25-35% of normal fleet ship DPS against their most unoptimal targets (0 in the stat their damage scales with). This way, they can still be noticible when not it their "target situations", but still be weak enough in those worst case situations such that you would want to try to put them in situations with armored/high energy using targets.
Possibly something similar with vultures.


For the armor boosters, I liked Spikey00's suggestion to make their biosted targets have
boosted_armor = max(min_boosted_armor, multiplier * original armor), for some yet to be determined minimum boosted armor. (2000? Subject to adjustment once armor gets rebalanced)

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #19 on: February 19, 2012, 03:37:00 pm »
For example, polarizers have a base damage of like 200 or something (on medium caps) the problem is that this is also their minimum damage (what they do vs. targets with 0 armor)
This is WAY too small.
On high caps, epic combat style they do 48*mk per shot, with MinimumAttackMultiplier = 4 and MaximumAttackMultiplier = 100.  They fire once every 2 seconds, too.  So their minimum cap-dps is just shy of 18k and their maximum is about 470k.  30k is normally as low as we want non-bonus to go, and 300k is normally as high as we want bonus to go (i.e. a ship with 10x) multipliers  (for reference, a type with no multipliers usually gets around 100k for everything).  The polarizer is outside that range so it can be a bit more special.  And they hit anything with 10k armor or higher really hard.

Also, since their attack is multiplier by the square root (precalculated, before you ask) of target armor, even something with only 150 armor (the usual minimum for a fleet ship that has any) gives a 12x multiplier, or 54k cap-dps.  And against that same ship, if that ship is mkIV (600 armor) the multiplier is 24, or 108k cap-dps.  And some fleet ships have 300*mk, 450*mk, 600*mk, or even 750*mk.

In other words, mathematically, I don't see how they're really _that_ bad.  But we can tighten up the range if it will make people feel better.

IREs have a non-multiplied cap-dps of 14.7k, but their minimum multiplier is 5, and maximum is 30, for a real range of 73.5k to 441k.  They do minimum to anything <= 5120 energy, maximum to anything >= 30720 energy.  But even a consistent 73.5k across the board is better general damage than most ships get, and 441k is well outside the range non-special fleet ships can typically achieve.

So IREs have a higher "floor" but get off that floor less regularly than the polarizers (who get off it as soon as the target has 25 armor or more).

I say make the balance the impulse reactors and the polarizers such that they do 25-35% of normal fleet ship DPS against their most unoptimal targets (0 in the stat their damage scales with). This way, they can still be noticible when not it their "target situations", but still be weak enough in those worst case situations such that you would want to try to put them in situations with armored/high energy using targets.
Possibly something similar with vultures.

Vultures have a non-multiplied cap-dps of about 3k, with minimum multiplier of 10 and maximum multiplier of 90, for effective range of 30k to 270k.  That could probably stand to be about 25% higher due to the special nature of the range.  On the other hand, they will typically experience their max-ish range (firing on stuff with 10% or less health) in any given fight.  I might give them an insta-fire attack (like snipers, but without the infinite range... though that would be interesting, albeit not as much due to sniper immunities out there).


Anyway, just making sure we're working with the same numbers here :)
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 c4sc4

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 253
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #20 on: February 19, 2012, 03:54:33 pm »
And yes, I think the Space Tank could stand a Rommelization.  I'm just never sure what to do for it, other than just buff stats.  At one point I implemented a mechanic where if a space tank hit a ship that ship's reload bar was reset to need the full reload cycle again, but I would have had to make so many things immune to it to avoid really unbalanced stuff (20 tanks locking down a mothership, etc) that there didn't seem much point.

Is it possible to give a ship two attacks? If so maybe the space tank could be give a more fighter style attack as well. Tanks in real life tend to have a main cannon and a machine gun, so why not do the same for the space tank.

Offline Shrugging Khan

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,217
  • Neinzul Y PzKpfw Tiger!
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #21 on: February 19, 2012, 04:11:51 pm »
Make it modular.

This is something I wanted for a long time, and I hope it's not to hard to implement. But how about this: Give it one or two module slots, in addition to its main attack Players can then attach a secondary weapon (and a tertiary, or maybe a mini-shield? A super-low-power repair beam? Armour/Munitions boosting ability? The decoy drone thing?). Furthermore, make its main attack have more damage but a slower reload rate. Then reduce its bonuses against various hull types, and cut its cap down by half, and give it a little armour boost.

In effect, that'd make it live up to its name. Big gun, flexible secondary/tertiary armaments, slow speed compared to other vehicles, tough armour, low numbers. A tank.
The beatings shall continue
until morale improves!

Offline Spikey00

  • Lord of just 5 Colony Ships
  • Master Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,704
  • And he sayeth to sea worm, thou shalt wriggle
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #22 on: February 19, 2012, 04:18:45 pm »
- Spiders are probably the worst on the list now, with the teleport station in tow.  Very low HP, low engine damage, low range and no combat worth.

Low HP, yes.  Already doubled that for 5.027 while I was converting the Anti-Starship Vs to Spiders.
Low ED, yes.  Already quadrupled that for 5.027 to bring it into the same ballpark as spider turrets (a full cap of Spider Is + a full cap of Spider IIs will now have about a full cap of Spider Turret's EDPS, combined; and so on)

Low Range?  They've all got the same range as a mkI missile frigate; how is that low?  Compared to sniper units, yes, but c'mon ;)

No combat worth?  How so?  A full cap of mkIs does 235k dps against its bonus targets (which include fighters, raid starships, most melee ships, etc).  Only 9 bonus/triangle ship types do more than that in the bonus case, and 3 of those are self-destructing units.  How is that not combat worth?

Really, even with zero ED these would be at least capable in combat.  Their cap-hp was in the eyebot range which was too low, but not entirely inappropriate considering their low e and m+c costs.

Combat worth in overall (mostly the HP, being one/two-shot by frigates), and without their bonuses they only hit for 78.4k DPS.  By mistake I thought their range was somewhere around 6k... 10k range isn't bad--not as great in a large fleet ball--but, granted these are in theory supposed to be micro'd mildly, I'll leave it at that.

Anyhow, it's looking pretty good come 5.027.


__

Holy shoot, module fleet ships?  I remember the idea of anything having modules being a fabled tale during the SlimDX era.  Although, I wish that could be done exclusively with a new expansion faction--of course, if the idea was feasible. 
I'd take a sea worm any time over a hundred emotionless spinning carriers.
irc.appliedirc.com / #aiwar
AI War Facebook
AI War Steam Group

Offline Hearteater

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,334
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #23 on: February 19, 2012, 04:52:09 pm »
I'm going to have to say Armor Ship.  Assuming any armor rework is a ways off, I feel this ship is the worst remaining ship at present.  Most of the others can be useful, even if only to a limited extent.  But Armor Ships are just a waste.

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #24 on: February 19, 2012, 04:59:31 pm »
I'm going to have to say Armor Ship.  Assuming any armor rework is a ways off, I feel this ship is the worst remaining ship at present.  Most of the others can be useful, even if only to a limited extent.  But Armor Ships are just a waste.

Not sure I would say they are the worst, but they are bad.
I know their description says they are supposed to have poor firepower, but does it need to be quite as poor as it is currently? (Come to think of it, what is their cap DPS compared to the target fleetship cap DPS?)

Their real problem is that they don't have enough durability (both armor and hp) to live their name, shipcap, or cost.

1500 armor for the Mk. I is pretty high by fleetship standards, but not that high, and most certainly not high enough to make a difference in most battles, especially considering their below average (but not hideous) speed.

Offline TechSY730

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,570
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #25 on: February 19, 2012, 06:16:49 pm »

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #26 on: February 19, 2012, 07:14:11 pm »
I know their description says they are supposed to have poor firepower, but does it need to be quite as poor as it is currently? (Come to think of it, what is their cap DPS compared to the target fleetship cap DPS?)
About 47k/188k non-bonus/bonus.  Bonuses are Light, UltraLight, Swarmer, Structural, and Turret; so that includes Fighters, Forcefields, Raid Starships among the particularly common/annoying.  Still, that's kind of a low bonus-dps to go against 47k non-bonus.  But that was largely because it was so much more durable.  But my valuation of durability was just off-the-cuff, anyhow (though a lot of the "this ship sucks" complaints seem to be against the stuff on the low end of the durability scale, with ~5M mkI cap-health).

Quote
Their real problem is that they don't have enough durability (both armor and hp) to live their name, shipcap, or cost.
I have to ask: what would be enough durability?  The things have 30M cap health.  The only other fleet ship that high is shield bearers (zenith mirrors technically have 150M, but that's because they take 10x damage from everything).  Next down, only 7 fleet ship types have ~20M.  Tigers have ~17M.  Then there are 11 types with ~15M, and from then on it's ~10M (17 types) or ~5M (17 types). (edit: some of those have changed, the numbers I had are from 5.024, but it's pretty close)

As for the armor; I do agree that the mechanic needs attention, but 750 armor vs a mkI fighter's 1200 attack power (on high caps) is a 62.5% damage reduction (edit: nvm, forgot the fighter has 750 armor piercing, heh).  I don't have the per-shot strength of each type in front of me, I'll try to remember to add that to my balance export.  Anyway, that armor, on top of having 2x/3x/6x as much hp as most other fleet ships in the game... if that's not durability, is any fleet ship durable?

All that said, sure, they could use a dps boost.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2012, 07:24:22 pm by keith.lamothe »
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 keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #27 on: February 19, 2012, 07:19:21 pm »
Make it modular.

This is something I wanted for a long time, and I hope it's not to hard to implement. But how about this: Give it one or two module slots, in addition to its main attack Players can then attach a secondary weapon (and a tertiary, or maybe a mini-shield? A super-low-power repair beam? Armour/Munitions boosting ability? The decoy drone thing?). Furthermore, make its main attack have more damage but a slower reload rate. Then reduce its bonuses against various hull types, and cut its cap down by half, and give it a little armour boost.

In effect, that'd make it live up to its name. Big gun, flexible secondary/tertiary armaments, slow speed compared to other vehicles, tough armour, low numbers. A tank.
I'd love to do this, but we'd probably have to make it a starship instead of a bonus ship type, because modular stuff involves a lot more UI work for the player (at least getting the queues set up).  And removing a bonus ship type from the game isn't a great idea for a variety of code reasons, so basically it would be "add tank starship, rename tank bonus ship to bomber-that-kills-bombers or whatever".  But for that, I'm a little lacking in art support for the starship graphics :)
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 Shrugging Khan

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,217
  • Neinzul Y PzKpfw Tiger!
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #28 on: February 19, 2012, 07:29:00 pm »
Can't you just up-scale the tank graphics and add a little letter (S for Starship?) to it?  :P
The beatings shall continue
until morale improves!

Offline keith.lamothe

  • Arcen Games Staff
  • Arcen Staff
  • Zenith Council Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,505
Re: Nominations for Worst Ship Ever (II)
« Reply #29 on: February 19, 2012, 07:38:38 pm »
Can't you just up-scale the tank graphics and add a little letter (S for Starship?) to it?  :P
Hooray for pixellated graphics, right? :)
Have ideas or bug reports for one of our games? Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports. Thanks for helping to make our games better!