Need more info on how differing Laser and Shield module work

[yurch]

@Driver

i don’t think that any shield below shield generator 2 is it worth using, at least if you can afford the energy and crew for the better ones. just compare the light shield with the fast recharge…

Apparently by the numbers, the light cruiser generator edges out the fast gen in recharge/power, recharge/cost, and recharge/crew. I’m not sure, but I don’t think diminishing returns apply to recharge rates.

Of course, at this point you’re giving up substantial shield strength, but it looks like it gives us a sort of inverse-multiphasic option.

i don’t see how throwing in a light shield would do any good, since if it collapses and then some shots penetrate the hull as you stated, chances are high your modules get destroyed, including shields and weapons.

As we established earlier, the highest resist shield currently always takes precedence, even if it’s not active. So if you’ve got a reflective shield gen and several light ones on the ship, that ship will always have maximum immunity as long as any single shield is active.

It’s not exactly a reliable solution, but it means it is possible for there to be a class of cruisers extremely resistant to beam weaponry.

[dielie]

no one has answered my question =(

[AntiSocialMunky]

I dunno, the high end shield setups are all pretty much the same. Yours is fairly flexible but expensive. Most people use the Reflective + Multiphasic because its more economical. Not more more to say.

Also for the lighter shield its not a great idea to stack them for obvious reasons. All I’m saying is that for a budget cruiser they do a good job.

[Driver]

hi,

@AntiSocialMunky

They are good for Tribes ships since the 16 resist negates a ton of damage from fighters.

so the tribe’s 50% penalty doesn’t affect resistance too? that’s good to know.

@yurch

@Driver

i don’t think that any shield below shield generator 2 is it worth using, at least if you can afford the energy and crew for the better ones. just compare the light shield with the fast recharge…

Apparently by the numbers, the light cruiser generator edges out the fast gen in recharge/power, recharge/cost, and recharge/crew. I’m not sure, but I don’t think diminishing returns apply to recharge rates.

Of course, at this point you’re giving up substantial shield strength, but it looks like it gives us a sort of inverse-multiphasic option.

comparing everything to costs, the light shield is on top, yes. but given the fact that you have to spent one module slot for each, i think it’s better to have the overall better stats.
and it would be nice to know if stacking penalty only affects shield strength.

greetings
driver

[AntiSocialMunky]

It doesn’t. A 16 resist shield on a tribes cruiser resists all missiles which have 12 pen vs a theoretical 8 resist if the Tribes penalty halved the resist.

Might balance it out if the Tribes did have halved resists as they just have too much HP right now. :-p

[dielie]

But we have hardly any armour or shields!

[AntiSocialMunky]

One of Dogthinker’s Tribe tanks has over 9000 HP.

[tater]

I see a new module idea.

Cruiser Hull Reenforcement “For a cost in both credits, added weight, and lost ship volume, your engineers can strengthen the hull of your entire ship.”

Cost: 200
Weight: 200
Hit Points: 1000

Or whatever weight to hitpoint ratio makes sense. Make a few sizes to choose from. Obviously frigate versions available as well. Yeah, a wasted standard module, but someone might want to use it.

[Bluebreaker]

with a module with a hitpoint/cost of 5, I don’t see why it would not be overpowered.

[AntiSocialMunky]

That’s a tribe repair module. Except you don’t get all those HPs at the beginning.

[tater]

@Bluebreaker

with a module with a hitpoint/cost of 5, I don’t see why it would not be overpowered.

I made the numbers up. I don’t “game” ships when I play, actually, I try and make a balanced ship that feels plausible (for the GSB universe). I’d never make an armored ship out front, for example, in my eyes that is nothing more than an exploit.

The cost to hitpoint ratio also needs to consider the number of slots used up.

[dielie]

@tater

@Bluebreaker

with a module with a hitpoint/cost of 5, I don’t see why it would not be overpowered.

I made the numbers up. I don’t “game” ships when I play, actually, I try and make a balanced ship that feels plausible (for the GSB universe). I’d never make an armored ship out front, for example, in my eyes that is nothing more than an exploit.

The cost to hitpoint ratio also needs to consider the number of slots used up.

I never tank. That’s what my three engine, 2 repair module, GSB, supercharged tractor beam cruiser laser wielding tribe cruiser is for!

[Bluebreaker]

@tater

@Bluebreaker

with a module with a hitpoint/cost of 5, I don’t see why it would not be overpowered.

I made the numbers up. I don’t “game” ships when I play, actually, I try and make a balanced ship that feels plausible (for the GSB universe). I’d never make an armored ship out front, for example, in my eyes that is nothing more than an exploit.

The cost to hitpoint ratio also needs to consider the number of slots used up.

Just to give an idea. On a full Rebel Valkyrie replacing a comon module with your proposed hp module, It increases the ratio from 0,7 to 1,1

[tater]

It would need some testing and tweaking, obviously. I’ve seen discussion about which “useful” modules have excellent hitpoints as an added bonus. Seems to be a “structural improvements” module makes a lot of sense—particularly since some hulls get an integrity bonus, which presumably increases hitpoints by X% for all modules, right?

The total amount, weight cost, etc are up for grabs as it needs to have pros as well as cons. The real cons for it are speed reduction via additional weight, and the loss of a slot to put a module that does something.

[AcePalarum]

@tater

I see a new module idea.

Cruiser Hull Reenforcement “For a cost in both credits, added weight, and lost ship volume, your engineers can strengthen the hull of your entire ship.”

Cost: 200
Weight: 200
Hit Points: 1000

Or whatever weight to hitpoint ratio makes sense. Make a few sizes to choose from. Obviously frigate versions available as well. Yeah, a wasted standard module, but someone might want to use it.

I won’t venture a guess on the numbers, but I like the concept. As long as it doesn’t make it easily possible to improve any other race ships to a Tribe equivalent. It might also quiet some of the concerns about the Tribe “simply having too many HP” if you have the option to improve the other races’ standing in that regard.

Probably two levels for Cruiser (Hull Reinforcement, Heavy Hull Reinforcement) and just one for frigates.

[Stryder]

@tater

@Bluebreaker

with a module with a hitpoint/cost of 5, I don’t see why it would not be overpowered.

I made the numbers up. I don’t “game” ships when I play, actually, I try and make a balanced ship that feels plausible (for the GSB universe). I’d never make an armored ship out front, for example, in my eyes that is nothing more than an exploit.

The cost to hitpoint ratio also needs to consider the number of slots used up.

About placing armored ships out front, I believe as Admiral Ackabar would say,“Its a trap!”

[AcePalarum]

@tater

I don’t “game” ships when I play, actually, I try and make a balanced ship that feels plausible (for the GSB universe). I’d never make an armored ship out front, for example, in my eyes that is nothing more than an exploit.

This actually sounds kind of like how I build my ships (although I will bow to the inevitable a bit if balanced ships simply aren’t working in a given scenario). I am curious as to exactly what you mean by “gaming” ships, though.

[tater]

@AcePalarum

@tater

I don’t “game” ships when I play, actually, I try and make a balanced ship that feels plausible (for the GSB universe). I’d never make an armored ship out front, for example, in my eyes that is nothing more than an exploit.

This actually sounds kind of like how I build my ships (although I will bow to the inevitable a bit if balanced ships simply aren’t working in a given scenario). I am curious as to exactly what you mean by “gaming” ships, though.

It goes to my suggestion to allow premade “fleets” that players then pick from to make or answer challenges. Not special ships that you use in a nebula only, or special ships that you use vs a particular tactic.

By “gaming” I mean that you get a challenge—for argument one that seems plausible as sci-fi story telling. Alien fleet with the usual suspects of ship types that are somewhat balanced for any possibility. The idea being that the ships that fight would be the ships you had at the time, it’s not like the USN or RN see a german or japanese task force, then custom built ships right then and there to counter it.

So to me, making a suicide armor blob that the enemy will mindlessly attack is just “gaming the game” to win. It’s not that the guy with the anchor ship has a better fleet, it’s that he knows the AI is stupid and will waste effort on it—something that might happen ONCE in RL, then they’d ignore the anchor ship.

Dunno, the whole idea of custom designing a force to beat a challenge bugs me.

To my mind, I try and make a “navy” of ships that seem useful/cool, then do the same for an enemy, then “use what I have” to develop tactics that work with them. For federation I have a couple CA types, a CV, a CVL, some missile heavy frigates, some escort frigates, and some knife-fighting frigates. I make “fighters” and “bombers” with the fighter hulls—the former tasked mostly with “space superiority,” and the latter with attacking ships.

I try to make the best ships I can, then use a mix of forces. I don’t alter my designs to beat a specific challenge, I alter them to generally improve them.

I suppose this is why I want the races less homogeneous. Right now, every race gets virtually identical everything except for hulls, and the usual paradigm is to custom-build a squadron to take on any particular challenge. Doesn’t interest me.

[AcePalarum]

@tater

It goes to my suggestion to allow premade “fleets” that players then pick from to make or answer challenges. Not special ships that you use in a nebula only, or special ships that you use vs a particular tactic.

By “gaming” I mean that you get a challenge—for argument one that seems plausible as sci-fi story telling. Alien fleet with the usual suspects of ship types that are somewhat balanced for any possibility. The idea being that the ships that fight would be the ships you had at the time, it’s not like the USN or RN see a german or japanese task force, then custom built ships right then and there to counter it.

So to me, making a suicide armor blob that the enemy will mindlessly attack is just “gaming the game” to win. It’s not that the guy with the anchor ship has a better fleet, it’s that he knows the AI is stupid and will waste effort on it—something that might happen ONCE in RL, then they’d ignore the anchor ship.

Dunno, the whole idea of custom designing a force to beat a challenge bugs me.

To my mind, I try and make a “navy” of ships that seem useful/cool, then do the same for an enemy, then “use what I have” to develop tactics that work with them. For federation I have a couple CA types, a CV, a CVL, some missile heavy frigates, some escort frigates, and some knife-fighting frigates. I make “fighters” and “bombers” with the fighter hulls—the former tasked mostly with “space superiority,” and the latter with attacking ships.

I try to make the best ships I can, then use a mix of forces. I don’t alter my designs to beat a specific challenge, I alter them to generally improve them.

I suppose this is why I want the races less homogeneous. Right now, every race gets virtually identical everything except for hulls, and the usual paradigm is to custom-build a squadron to take on any particular challenge. Doesn’t interest me.

I can see where you’re coming from. I don’t do custom designs for a given scenario either, with the exception that if I know going in that shields will be useless, I will usually go tweak a few ships to reduce their dependence on shields. And I can rationalize that by assuming the Spatial Anomalies dialog represents advance scouting or sensor data.So I put my customization on the deployment screen - custom deployment rather than custom design.

My navy for each race usually consists of 10-12 designs which I tinker with a bit here and there as I unlock better modules or as I notice better tactical combinations. Not so different from normal military R&D.

I agree that using different races would be more appealing if they were significantly different beyond the basic shared technologies that any spacefaring war fleet would have. As in, right now I’m fooling around with the Empire and trying to figure out the best ways to use their ships. Not an insignificant task since every Empire ship I design rolls in at 50%-100% more expensive than the same style of ship in other races. But most of that uniqueness is in the hull design (cost and modules/hardpoints) rather than specific technologies etc.

Glad to know there’s at least one other person out there that doesn’t have a mile-long list of ridiculously specific ship designs for this or that challenge.

[PacerX]

@AcePalarum

@tater

I don’t “game” ships when I play, actually, I try and make a balanced ship that feels plausible (for the GSB universe). I’d never make an armored ship out front, for example, in my eyes that is nothing more than an exploit.

This actually sounds kind of like how I build my ships (although I will bow to the inevitable a bit if balanced ships simply aren’t working in a given scenario). I am curious as to exactly what you mean by “gaming” ships, though.

I’ll bow to the inevitable also from time to time also, but I mostly like to field a balanced fleet.

For instance, if someone is going to post up a plasma steamroller, I’ll design up a few hulls specifically to wreck the plasma fleet.