Poll: Buff Spirecraft Health?

[contingencyplan]

I commented earlier tonight that Spirecraft seem to have hulls made from the finest wet tissue paper. This prompted me to consider their health, in particular of the Spirecraft Siege Tower, which purports to be able to "[repel] a beating." (This is the only Spirecraft I have built right now, so I haven't gone and done a comprehensive examination via the wiki or spreadsheet.)

The MkI Siege Tower has 4M health and 12k armor (I'm playing low caps, but I don't think that makes a difference here). I think it's worth noting that (pure health-wise, per-ship) it is outclassed in health by every MkI combat starship save Raids due to their recent buff. The closest is the Leech and Plasma Seige starships with 10M health and 300 armor. With a cap-health of 8 * 4M = 32M, it is still outclassed by the MkI Bomber Starship (cap-health of 36M, 300 armor) and Zenith Starship (36M, 1k armor).

I do realize that their armor will essentially make their health 20M for many smaller ships (if I understand armor semantics correctly), but larger ships like guardians and starships are likely to outstrip that pretty quickly.

I also realize that their attack is significantly high (40k * 20 = 800k), but that doesn't do much good if larger ships (especially if not in a 1v1 battle) can nuke them down in a hurry.

Finally, I do realize that especially for the lower marks, there are plenty of asteroids to rebuild them, but for a superweapon, they shouldn't feel like they go down as easily as starships. Furthermore, I would like to use those asteroids to build other spire ships (especially considering I can't repair some of them at all) instead of constantly rebuilding the "combat Spirecraft fleet."

Has anybody else had similar thoughts? Am I using them wrong? Does anybody think they're actually overpowered? I created the poll above to

[TechSY730]

Except for the ones not designed for direct combat, like the spirecraft scout and the attritioner.

Though there seems to have been reports that the spirecraft scout was over nerfed...

Those that are supposed to be somewhat fragile (like the ion blaster) can still use some buff, but IMO, not so much so that they don't lose this aspect.

[TechSY730]

Also, I would like to point out that I feel that the spirecraft are long overdue for a balance pass anyways.

[Wingflier]

I think the entire "Spirecraft Armada" needs a balance overhaul; every single one of them.

It's such an wonky assortment of ships, some which are incredibly useful, and some which are so situational and/or just useless it's quite confusing.

The idea itself is brilliant, and I've always wanted to use it, but I find it to be too severely lacking in polish or balance to be tenable.

[Histidine]

There's also the fact that on Spirecraft - Moderate, their penalty is LOL NO REPAIR. Makes the combat spirecraft of rather limited usefulness.

[onyhow]

Yes, but mainly for combat spirecraft...

But yeah spirecraft as a whole probably need some rebalancing...

[chemical_art]

They lack the oomph of golems. they need to make more of an impact.

[laughingman]

I voted yes for the combat spirecraft (Implosion Artillery and Siege Towers). Siege are fairly effective at countering lots of smaller ships but wildly underpowered against anything bigger. They're outranged by a lot of dangerous things, too.

I will say this for them, though: a full cap of Mk1-III towers has significant firepower and makes a fleetball pretty dangerous.

[keith.lamothe]

We've done balance passes on these before and I've seen/heard people get great use out of the Martyr, Penetrator, Jumpship, Attritioner, Implosion, and (until its recent encounter with the nerfhammer in a dark alley) Spirecraft Scout.  The Ion Blaster still has targeting weirdnesses (to the point that I think just giving it a different weapon may be the best way forward; ion stuff is really weird).  The Siege Tower gets mixed feedback (as seen here; dangerous enough to be worthwhile but flimsy enough to quirk eyebrows).  The shieldbearer can turn an exo from dangerous to death-on-wheels in AI hands and has some specific lifesaving utility in human hands (EMP immunity) but the whole no-repair thing makes a lot of people steer clear of using them (but if they could be repaired, well, the balance implications would be kind of immense).  The Ram I hear less about, but I've seen the miniram be used to great effect so I figure something similar applies there.

And that's all of them.

Basically some folks are pretty happy with them, and some folks think they whole group is just broken.  Not sure what to make of that.  It's probably partly due to how most of them are utility units rather than kick-down-the-door main combatants.  But generally speaking there's plenty of main combatants in the game and it's the utility players (like the riot starship) that add a lot more tactical variety.

Anyway, I certainly agree with buffing the siege tower's health in light of where starship health is now.  My question is: how much health should an (individual) mkI siege tower have, compared to a cap of mkI starships?  For fun we could also give it actual siege plasma ammo, with all the aoe and forcefield-related implications thereof (I don't mind if it still shoots fleet ships).

Other than that, I think just giving the Ion Blaster a different weapon (and corresponding rename) would be wiser than trying to get the perennially finicky ion targeting where people actually would want it.  I'm leaning towards something ED/paralysis/etc related to keep it in the general theme of anti-fleetship.  Either way, its health could be retuned according to whatever the siege tower's target is.

Which other spirecraft do you think need more health?

[Toranth]

We've done balance passes on these before and I've seen/heard people get great use out of the Martyr, Penetrator, Jumpship, Attritioner, Implosion, and (until its recent encounter with the nerfhammer in a dark alley) Spirecraft Scout.  The Ion Blaster still has targeting weirdnesses (to the point that I think just giving it a different weapon may be the best way forward; ion stuff is really weird).  The Siege Tower gets mixed feedback (as seen here; dangerous enough to be worthwhile but flimsy enough to quirk eyebrows).  The shieldbearer can turn an exo from dangerous to death-on-wheels in AI hands and has some specific lifesaving utility in human hands (EMP immunity) but the whole no-repair thing makes a lot of people steer clear of using them (but if they could be repaired, well, the balance implications would be kind of immense).  The Ram I hear less about, but I've seen the miniram be used to great effect so I figure something similar applies there.

And that's all of them.

Which other spirecraft do you think need more health?

Rams and Penetrators are good as is, and the Martyr is still OP.

Attritioners are a little too fragile right now.  Attritioners are exceedingly vulnerable to sniper shots, especially when you need to pop a carrier in an already full system.

Implosion artillerly are almost as fragile, but need to get much closer.  Still long range, but they have problems with standoff distance when using auto-kite.  On top of that, they have targetting issues:  They tend to shoot the same target over and over again until it dies, rather than switching off to shoot other things that have many more HP.  You can manually target to fix this, but bleh, micro...

Re:  Siege Towers - HP is the same as the Ion Blaster, and damage is actually LESS in DPS, but without the instant-kill or Engine Damage.


In my opinion, since all Spirecraft are so limited in number (especially mid-to-high marks), they need to be tough enough to survive without constant attention and detailed micromanagement (again, especially the higher marks).  Becuase of this, I tend to use only the ones that don't participate in combat (Attritioners, scouts, etc) or the ones that are expendable (Martyr, Rams).

[PokerChen]

Siege Tower specifically, and maybe Attritioner and Implosion.
-- I'm used to keeping Implosions around on a separate control group under glass or cloak to help with fortifications...
-- On Siege Towers, if I already have a blob, it kinda just adds to DPS. Need to test it with new starships, as haven't played in a while.

[chemical_art]

Rams and Penetrators are good as is, and the Martyr is still OP.

Attritioners are a little too fragile right now.  Attritioners are exceedingly vulnerable to sniper shots, especially when you need to pop a carrier in an already full system.

Implosion artillerly are almost as fragile, but need to get much closer.  Still long range, but they have problems with standoff distance when using auto-kite.  On top of that, they have targetting issues:  They tend to shoot the same target over and over again until it dies, rather than switching off to shoot other things that have many more HP.  You can manually target to fix this, but bleh, micro...

Re:  Siege Towers - HP is the same as the Ion Blaster, and damage is actually LESS in DPS, but without the instant-kill or Engine Damage.


In my opinion, since all Spirecraft are so limited in number (especially mid-to-high marks), they need to be tough enough to survive without constant attention and detailed micromanagement (again, especially the higher marks).  Becuase of this, I tend to use only the ones that don't participate in combat (Attritioners, scouts, etc) or the ones that are expendable (Martyr, Rams).

Well said.


Shield units can still be modified. Can they be modified so that they regen on their own? They could have the regen times of guardposts of two hours: That would make them (re)usable for key stands but not enough that they can really be abused.

I think for me, the core is that for the non-combat ships are OK to have low HP. But the combat ones sorely need health. Irreplacable units need high HP, otherwise they must be microed really, really heavily.

For me, I think the weakest of the direct combat ships should have the HP of, at the very least, the weakest starship. There is no reason they should not. They are meant to be bigger then starships after all. Stronger spirecraft can scale accordingly.

EDIT: Siege towers also need a fairly big buff to their damage. Their base dps is worst then that of the zenith starship, yet the zenith starship has bonuses to boot. I understand they have a higher cap, but if that is really the issue their caps can be reduced. It ties in to the whole "irreplacable units need to be powerful" thought process.

[orzelek]

I would also add that implosions could use immunity to radar dampening.
Most starships now have dampening and they are actual targets you would like to use artillery on.
And getting artillery unit into dampening range of starship is very unhealthy for them - especially with their small hit points.

[Hearteater]

Rams and Penetrators are good as is, and the Martyr is still OP.

Attritioners are a little too fragile right now.  Attritioners are exceedingly vulnerable to sniper shots, especially when you need to pop a carrier in an already full system.

Implosion artillerly are almost as fragile, but need to get much closer.  Still long range, but they have problems with standoff distance when using auto-kite.  On top of that, they have targetting issues:  They tend to shoot the same target over and over again until it dies, rather than switching off to shoot other things that have many more HP.  You can manually target to fix this, but bleh, micro...

Re:  Siege Towers - HP is the same as the Ion Blaster, and damage is actually LESS in DPS, but without the instant-kill or Engine Damage.


In my opinion, since all Spirecraft are so limited in number (especially mid-to-high marks), they need to be tough enough to survive without constant attention and detailed micromanagement (again, especially the higher marks).  Becuase of this, I tend to use only the ones that don't participate in combat (Attritioners, scouts, etc) or the ones that are expendable (Martyr, Rams).

Well said.


Shield units can still be modified. Can they be modified so that they regen on their own? They could have the regen times of guardposts of two hours: That would make them (re)usable for key stands but not enough that they can really be abused.

I think for me, the core is that for the non-combat ships are OK to have low HP. But the combat ones sorely need health. Irreplacable units need high HP, otherwise they must be microed really, really heavily.

For me, I think the weakest of the direct combat ships should have the HP of, at the very least, the weakest starship. There is no reason they should not. They are meant to be bigger then starships after all. Stronger spirecraft can scale accordingly.

EDIT: Siege towers also need a fairly big buff to their damage. Their base dps is worst then that of the zenith starship, yet the zenith starship has bonuses to boot. I understand they have a higher cap, but if that is really the issue their caps can be reduced. It ties in to the whole "irreplacable units need to be powerful" thought process.

Thirded.  And give Spirecraft Scouts shards.

[keith.lamothe]

Ok, in addition to:

My question is: how much health should an (individual) mkI siege tower have, compared to a cap of mkI starships?

I'm now asking: how much base dps and bonus dps should an (individual) mkI siege tower have, compared to a cap of mkI starships?


For balance purposes I generally balance spirecraft as individual units because the price of the asteroid is (I think) more significant than cap of how many you can have at a particular moment.  We can also look at that if necessary, though.

That doesn't mean an individual siege tower needs to be as strong as a cap of same-mark starships or fleet ships or whatever, just saying that I'm not really looking at "cap stats" on spirecraft.