The early game

[Draco18s]

And dont get me wrong, fleet ships are ok and all, but I find them too expensive for what they do. Mostly bombers and frigates, actually.

Yea, I found it odd that the amount of extra total resources is greater than the extra firepower you get from them compared to standard fighters. It used to be that frigates had a greater total cost than bombers. When people pointed this out, instead of lowering the cost of the frigate to mirror the bomber, they raised the cost of the bomber to mirror the frigate.

From the Mantis:

Frigate crystal cost dropped from 700 to 500 for 5.001. Thats 600 total m+c, compared to 200 for the fighter and 800 for the bomber.

I could be persuaded to go lower, just not wanting to throw numbers around too radically.

link

[Panopticon]

Starships in the early game are very situational for me and I only really use certain ones. Light Starships, Raid Starships and Scout Starships. And the Light Starships are extremely rare, like if a nearby planet is MK III/IV and I simply must take it instead of isolating it. It seems like we are seeing a lot more forcefields these days, so the Raid Ships are great and have good survivability in the early game. Scout Starships are just super useful and cheap. I always have some of those around.

[keith.lamothe]

FYI, I really, really want to put something in so that you can have a space dock or enclave starship churning out fleet ship replacements that automatically get forwarded to where you want them (and, optionally, folded into your selection when they arrive).  It's just not the kind of thing that's sufficiently fast and safe right now.  But I want something like that too.  A lot.

Maybe a sort of mobile intra-galactic warp gate that only applies to ships produced by docks in its control group... hmm...

[Draco18s]

Starships in the early game are very situational for me and I only really use certain ones. Light Starships, Raid Starships and Scout Starships. And the Light Starships are extremely rare, like if a nearby planet is MK III/IV and I simply must take it instead of isolating it. It seems like we are seeing a lot more forcefields these days, so the Raid Ships are great and have good survivability in the early game. Scout Starships are just super useful and cheap. I always have some of those around.

Light starships are best when placed in your turret blob.  Turrets have a max munitions boost they can receive, which is identical the amount of boost given by a light starship.

[Sunshine!]

Turrets can actually get up to a 2x boost from Military Command mk3.  Also, I'm fine with the early game, but I tend to ignore starships and use fleet ships heavily, because of which I can be very aggressive in the first couple hours as I make constant fighter raids, and then start throwing in bombers as they become built, with frigates on the defense (if I have the money).

[Lancefighter]

EDIT: For thread's relevancy. Normally I just blitz making fighter swarms (and my tech choice if it's cheap) till I acquire two planets.

This is actually EXACTLY my point. Fighters are the only fleet ship I find worthwhile to build, because a) they are cheap, b), they counter bombers, and c) they dont have any glaring weaknesses.

I can look at the fighters and see 'suicide ship', making them almost worthwhile to use. In my opinion, all basic fleet ships should be this cheap. When I look at bombers, I wonder why i would ever spend 1.4k metal on a ship that dies if a 200 metal fighter gives it a stern look. No, bombers should cost something like 350m/50c, with frigates being the opposite.
Make them actually cheap :\

[TechSY730]

EDIT: For thread's relevancy. Normally I just blitz making fighter swarms (and my tech choice if it's cheap) till I acquire two planets.

This is actually EXACTLY my point. Fighters are the only fleet ship I find worthwhile to build, because a) they are cheap, b), they counter bombers, and c) they dont have any glaring weaknesses.

I can look at the fighters and see 'suicide ship', making them almost worthwhile to use. In my opinion, all basic fleet ships should be this cheap. When I look at bombers, I wonder why i would ever spend 1.4k metal on a ship that dies if a 200 metal fighter gives it a stern look. No, bombers should cost something like 350m/50c, with frigates being the opposite.
Make them actually cheap :\

Making the total cost of bombers and frigates the same as fighters would be overkill because generally the damage output and survivability of those two are greater than the fighter.  I do support making both being made cheaper though. Just not that cheap.

It seems that you want them all to have the same dps (considering firepower, fire rate, shot type, average dps, average  dps against things they have a bonus against, average dps against things they are neutral against), surviability (considering HP, armor, hull type, and speed), and usefull damage bonuses (including multipliers, number of bonuses, number of ships with each hull type, the commonness of ships that have that hull type, the average threat or need to kill of ships with each hull type).
In other words, make all of the above equal, just with different bonus spreads. Then give them the same total cost.

Just as a note, I do NOT support such a reimagening of the triangle ships.

[Sunshine!]

I don't support this reimagining either.  I want bombers to be able to chew through forcefields, and I'm willing to spend the money to get them an escort so they can do their job unimpeded.  Bombers generally ARE expensive, and generally do need escorts, so it works out.  If you want something a bit less expensive and more effective against non-bonus, try Z Chameleons - I've developed a fondness for them as a very effective fighter-bomber (they even have higher DPS than fighters against non-bonus, plus double range, and do about half bonus damage compared to bombers).

I'll take the cost decrease to missile frigates - I don't think they really need it, but the concerns are valid (and they do take forever to build - over 15 minutes unassisted for a cap of mk1 frigates).

[chemical_art]

Making the total cost of bombers and frigates the same as fighters would be overkill because generally the damage output and survivability of those two are greater than the fighter.  I do support making both being made cheaper though. Just not that cheap.

I haven't thought enough about the complex relationships between the triangle ships, but how are the bomber and frigate more survivable then the fighter? The fighter has much higher raw HP. Sure, the bomber has some armor, but rarely does that make a difference in the big scheme of things. The frigate is just fragile overall.

The balance would be much more readily apparent if the bombers and frigates automatically prioritized attacking their bonus targets, because only then do they prove their worth. In non-micro fleet action, they just get blown away. I thought frigates were completely useless, but after fighting against Z-bombers they finally moved up to "niche, micro managing unit" instead of "wasted resources"

I find myself consistently following this routine through my games in terms of building priorities:

Fighters > secondary fleet ships  > bombers*> starships > frigates

*- unless there is a pressing need to bring down a shield or fort. But if there is any other way of removing the shield  (golem, secondary unit) I often use that way. Only during the rare, RARE times before I find my first golem do I use frigates unless I am countering Z-bombers

If the price difference between the triangle ships was not so great, they would seem more balanced because they seem to be balanced aside from their cost. The AI also doesn't treat them differently in terms of numbers.

[TechSY730]

If you know how to abuse their range, the survivability of missile frigates can be quite high. (Auto-kiting can help greatly with that)
And yes, bombers are a bit fragile, but their damage output against most stuff that needs lots of punishment to kill makes them have a higher DPS for those cases than the standard fighter does.

I do agree reassessing their actual usefulness (with regard to the changes that are coming to them in 5.001), and finding a reasonable amount of extra cost for them to have is warranted though.

It doesn't seem right for any of two other triangle ships to be cheaper in total cost than the standard fighter though. If one of them is found to be less useful and therefore deserves less cost, buff it until it can match the standard fighter in terms of usefulness. The standard fighter has always had the tradition of being the cheapest of the three triangle ships, and I think that should stay, or at the most make all of them have the same total cost.

[BobTheJanitor]

The balance would be much more readily apparent if the bombers and frigates automatically prioritized attacking their bonus targets, because only then do they prove their worth. In non-micro fleet action, they just get blown away.

It makes one wonder if this could have any viability as a control node. I know there is a focus-fire setting for them to do the most damage rather than kill the most efficiently. Is toggling that likely have any effect on this behavior? I've not toyed with that option yet. Although it seems more likely to do the opposite of this when it's turned on. I kind of assumed they already did something like this, actually. How do they pick what to shoot?

Also, just to have it in the thread since it seems pertinent to the discussion, here are the upcoming beta changes:

Some triangle rebalancing:

    * The rationale here is that bombers have been having their way with forcefields a bit too much, and having fighters be so much more "general-dps" than the other two has made them much less a natural predator of the Bomber. Also, the Missile Frigate is still being reported as the least desirable by a significant margin.
    * Fighters (including the tachyon and bulletproof variants) :
          o Bonus vs Polycrystal from 2.4 => 5.
    * Bombers:
          o Bonus vs UltraHeavy from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Structural from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Heavy from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Artillery from 10 => 6.
          o Base Attack Power from 1900*mk => 2400*mk.
    * Missile Frigates:
          o Bonus vs Light from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs UltraLight from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Swarmer from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Neutron from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Composite from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Refractive from 10 => 6.
          o Base Attack Power from 1600*mk => 2400*mk.
          o Base Crystal Cost from 700 => 500.

[TechSY730]

The balance would be much more readily apparent if the bombers and frigates automatically prioritized attacking their bonus targets...

Doesn't the auto-targeting already do that some? It may not be very apparent, because if they start firing on something they don't have a bonus on, and something they do have a bonus on comes into range, they won't consider re-targeting the thing they have a bonus on until what they are firing on is dead, escaped to another planet, or rendered untargetable for some reason (like cloaking). Of course by then, it may be too late.

Also, I think non-sniper focus fire makes ships try to target the same things that ships near them are targeting, not just copy the target of ships near them of the same type. And if you have a preferred target set, and something that fits that preferred target is in range, I think that takes priority over bonus considerations.

[chemical_art]

Doesn't the auto-targeting already do that some? It may not be very apparent, because if they start firing on something they don't have a bonus on, and something they do have a bonus on comes into range, they won't consider re-targeting the thing they have a bonus on until what they are firing on is dead, escaped to another planet, or rendered untargetable for some reason (like cloaking). Of course by then, it may be too late.

It's hard to say, but generally I find that not to be the case. Then again, most of my fleet action has the outcome decided within 30 seconds, so perhaps there just isn't enough time for the counters to "reset" before the outcome has already been decided.

Also, I think non-sniper focus fire makes ships try to target the same things that ships near them are targeting, not just copy the target of ships near them of the same type. And if you have a preferred target set, and something that fits that preferred target is in range, I think that takes priority over bonus considerations.

I find that the ships  just shoot whatever they want (if they are focusing on a ship type, then randomly shoot that one ship type), rather then they all shooting at the same thing, even in extended engagements after any potential counters would have long been reset.

[keith.lamothe]

The balance would be much more readily apparent if the bombers and frigates automatically prioritized attacking their bonus targets...

Doesn't the auto-targeting already do that some?

Yes, it goes to great pains to attack that which they will do well against.  Though without the focus-fire control it tends to spread fire out more (which has certain overkill-related advantages; personally I prefer focus-fire).

Also, I think non-sniper focus fire makes ships try to target the same things that ships near them are targeting, not just copy the target of ships near them of the same type.

Not really, focus-fire actually computes "how many times would I have to shoot this for it to die" for each eligible target, and sorts them in ascending order of that (this counts the partial-shots too, though those are not realistically different than a whole shot).  There are other considerations that can override, but that's probably the operative one in most cases.

And if you have a preferred target set, and something that fits that preferred target is in range, I think that takes priority over bonus considerations.

That is correct.

[chemical_art]

Some triangle rebalancing:

    * The rationale here is that bombers have been having their way with forcefields a bit too much, and having fighters be so much more "general-dps" than the other two has made them much less a natural predator of the Bomber. Also, the Missile Frigate is still being reported as the least desirable by a significant margin.
    * Fighters (including the tachyon and bulletproof variants) :
          o Bonus vs Polycrystal from 2.4 => 5.
    * Bombers:
          o Bonus vs UltraHeavy from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Structural from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Heavy from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Artillery from 10 => 6.
          o Base Attack Power from 1900*mk => 2400*mk.
    * Missile Frigates:
          o Bonus vs Light from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs UltraLight from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Swarmer from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Neutron from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Composite from 10 => 6.
          o Bonus vs Refractive from 10 => 6.
          o Base Attack Power from 1600*mk => 2400*mk.
          o Base Crystal Cost from 700 => 500.

That actually helps a lot, for it makes bombers and frigates less "niche" and generally more useful overall. Still, according to the frigate's tooltip it "fires powerful missiles, but with a long reload time" but neither its damage per shot nor firing time are noteworthy at all. Perhaps I should report it on the tooltip thread?