@ Darvin -- I'm of the opinion Carrier caps need to be reigned in just a little bit.  I think all caps have their uses, and while it is true some are best early game, if you go trying to rebalance the game based on the buffed out Carriers we are going to have other problems to contend with next patch.  If you think buffing up the other caps and carrier cruisers is a good solution, then there is not much reason to nerf LRMs because you will need them un-nerfed just to have a frigate capable of dealing with the beasts.  The rebalance will start to look like Distant Stars mod.  (Which is not necessarily a bad thing, but it has already been done, right?)

At one level, I completely agree with you, but on another level I like how strong a role carrier capital ships now have, and I'd prefer to see the other capital ships instead get a comparable role.  That may be a little more challenging than just rolling back the strength of the carriers, but I think it's a goal worth pursuing.  I don't think we need to really rip things up to do this, we just need to carefully put the right buffs and nerfs in the right locations. 

I agree with you here, though I still think something needs to be done here, but I'd definitely keep it very small and subtle.  I'm leaning towards the move speed nerf I talked about earlier.  They'd be just as strong in combat as before, but less capable of pursuing.

I really regard DS as more of a content mod.

Yes, but Capitals are quite strong, hence my point.

yeah the DS Capitals really come into their own in that mod, we even had to nerf them a bit in order to make it more balanced between cruiser/frigate vs caps but our MP games show some great cap usage (the Kol actually causes the enemy issues)

You can play regular Sins without caps if you want, but trying to play DS without caps is a disaster.  I only played one MP game of DS a long time ago, and I built more caps than usual and just slaughtered my opponent with them.  Frigates & Cruisers were like filler support for my cap ships.

First things first...thank you Darvin, Cykur, and everyone else for your suggestions...this is good and exactly what I'm looking for...

I tried posting something early in reply to Darvin's suggestion about Scramble Bombers, and I couldn't post, so sorry it took so long...

Darvin, I like your idea for Scramble Bombers...under my proposition, higher levels would have allowed for the bombers to be shot down before they were replenished, so I think you definitely bring up a good point of keeping the cooldown time low and constant...

The one issue I have with comparing ADA to Scramble bombers is that to me, they serve different purposes...ADA to me is a constant bonus, while Scramble bombers is more meant to have shock value...it gets you lots of bombers quickly, but once your anti-matter is depleted, your extra bombers are gone...

Jam Weapons, Phasic trap, subverters with their AoE disablement, MPs being good at taking out cap ships, phase stabilizers...all of these things have a general theme, and that is shock value...the Vasari hit you hard and quick with great shock potential, but don't have the staying power of the TEC or Advent fleets...this is what makes the Vasari different and I think Scramble bombers should follow this theme...so, this is why I compare scramble bombers more to anima tempest, because I think both serve the same purpose: shock value...

My previous numbers of 3/4/5 squadrons in the air obviously doesn't fit that theme (I must have got lost in the math, I don't know), and your numbers actually work quite well..

So people don't have to go back a page, Darvin's Scramble Bombers:

Duration of 60s, cooldown of 24s, antimatter cost of 35 across all levels...

This would allow 2.5/5/7.5 squadrons to accumulate at lvl 1/2/3...

I think that 7.5 (9 at some points) might be a little too high given how powerful Vasari bombers are...Vasari bombers have the most HP per individual SC, and these squads are only around for 60s...add in the potential of repair cloud, and honestly I don't think these scambled bombers are ever going to die until the ability duration makes them disappear...

Anima Tempest brings in 8-9 squadrons (if bombers), but they aren't there continuously...ADA brings in up to 3 that are continuous, but they can be shot down and have to be rebuilt the old fashion way...the SC provided by scramble bombers are going to be very difficult to kill given the low duration and cooldown times, so I am iffy on 7.5 accumulated squadrons...

However, your numbers work out very well and are definitely better than the current Scramble bombers...my concern is that 2.5/5/7.5 are going to still be a bit too powerful if the Skirantra can keep them up continuously for most if not all of a battle...therefore, I'm thinking that your numbers should be used, but with the antimatter cost = 45/50/55...

A lvl 5 Skirantra, with no antimatter technology, will have 350 antimatter and regenerate about 29 antimatter per use of Scamble Bombers (every 24s)...that essentially means lvl 3 scamble bombers costs basically 26 antimatter per use (less on higher level Skirantras)... that is more than 13 uses of lvl 3 Scramble Bombers (taking into account antimatter regeneration) before it has to wait for antimatter to regenerate...that is over 5 minutes (323s) of 7.5 extra squadrons, more than anima tempest + ADA lvl 3 when averaged out....even after 5 minutes, its still going to be able to support slightly over 3 squadrons continuously (same as ADA)...and this is just a lvl 5, higher level skirantras are going to keep it up even longer...

A lvl 3 Skirantra with lvl 2 scramble bombers has 300 antimatter and regenerates about 25 antimatter per use of scramble bombers...that is 12 uses of lvl 2 scramble bombers before it has to wait for antimatter to regenerate...

A lvl 1 Skirantra with lvl 1 scramble bombers has 250 antimatter and regenerates about 20 antimatter per use...that is about 12-13 uses of lvl 1 scramble bombers before it has to wait for antimatter to regenerate...

I like Darvins numbers, they are higher than 3/4/5 and allow accumulation faster...but this is more powerful than my original suggestion, so I think antimatter costs need to be higher...

Therefore, using Darvins numbers and my antimatter costs, I am proposing that Scramble bombers lvl 1/2/3 has a duration of 60s, a cooldown of 24s, and an antimatter cost of 45/50/55, allowing 2.5/5/7.5 bombers to accumulate for 12-13 uses, which is about 5 and a half minutes...

 

 

Now, as far as LRFs and fighters are concerned...

I have seen a lot of good suggestions, and after reading some of the later ones I'm reconsidering buffing fighters...whatever is done is going to be very tricky because it will affect many things...

A major concern with my proposal of nerfing LRFs against caps it that it will be very difficult to deal with capital ships early on...this is a very valid concern and needs careful thought...

Since solving the problem of LRFs and bombers is tied to the power of capital ships, I think it is a good idea to balance the capital ships first, and then look at LRFs and bombers...

As of right now, I think that buffing capital ships to more or less be on par with the Halcyon is the best course of action...

In another thread, several people posted a list that ranked capital ships...this is my list from that thread, though it is changed to take into account nerfing scramble bombers (so this is my estimate of how it will rank now)...

1) Halcyon

2) Skirantra

3) Sova

4) Progenitor

5) Akkan

6) Kortul

7) Jarrasul

8) Radiance

9) Marza

10) Dunov

11) Rapture

12) Revelation

13) Kol

14) Antorak

15) Vulkoras

This list is of course debatable, but the point isn't to precisely rank each ship....the point is to recognize how to improve each ship to compare to a Halcyon, and recognize how far each ship needs to be buffed...

I think that (even with scramble bombers nerfed somewhat) most experienced players will agree all 3 carriers and all 3 colonizers are going to be in the top 7 or 8....therefore, the first order of balancing capital ships I think is to balance the carriers in reference to eachother, and balance the colonizers in reference to eachother...these are the most powerful ships, so they don't need much buffing...rather, it is important that one faction doesn't have a huge advantage in the power of its carrier or colonizer, because that can cause a significant imbalance...

I'd like to focus on balancing the carriers first...scramble bombers obviously has to be nerfed, and I think we're close on a good solution to that...this of course will weaken the Skirantra, so I want to make sure it isn't too weak...the Sova I think, of the three carriers, is the weakest, but not by much, so I'm not yet sure on how to rebalance the carriers...

Right now, I think the Halcyon should be left untouched, the Skirantra should stay as is with scramble bombers nerfed as proposed above (or a similar proposal that may evolve later after feedback), and the Sova needs a slight (if ever so slight) buff...

Where to buff the Sova, I don't really know, I'd like some suggestions...or maybe, I am wrong and the Sova doesn't need any buffing at all...

I think a small buff is needed to put it on par with a halcyon, nothing major...

So far I see two possibilities...one, improve embargo...all levels of embargo have cooldown times of 120s and antimatter costs of 85, but the duration is 60/90/120...this means that lower levels of embargo not only aren't as good (30%/60%/100%) but they can't be run continuously...I think that making all levels of embargo have a duration of 120s would bring lvl 1 and 2 closer to lvl 3, and certainly would make Sova rushes more powerful...this is probably too powerful, so perhaps the antimatter cost could be raised as well...

Right now, the Antimatter cost is 85 for all levels...even a lvl 1 sova generates 102 antimatter over 120 seconds (the proposed duration of all levels of embargo, or the current duration of lvl 3), so even a lvl 1 Sova could run embargo continuously if only the cooldown and duration matched...therefore, I think that raising the antimatter cost to somewhere around 100 at lvl 1 would be appropriate...

A lvl 3 Sova regenerates about 125 antimatter over 2 minutes, and a lvl 5 Sova regenerates about 145 antimatter over 2 minutes...however, increasing the antimatter costs (85 -> 125 or 145 is huge) I think would weaken the Sova overall...with level 1 and 2 embargo buffed by a fair amount, I think they should cost slightly more antimatter such as 105/95/85, allowing higher level sovas to use missile batteries as much as they currently can now...

Therefore, I propose that embargo be changed from lvl 1/2/3 having a duration of 60/90/120 to a duration of 120 for all levels...in addition, the antimatter cost will be increased from 85 for all levels to 105/95/85...this will keep lvl 3 embargo the same, but significantly increase embargo 2 and especially embargo 1....

The problem with buffing embargo is that it makes the first Sova you build more powerful, but it doesn't make successive Sova's more powerful...nother possibility to buff the Sova is to make heavy SC or missile batteries more powerful...

I would even consider buffing embargo as suggested above and making a slight buff to heavy SC or missile batteries, but I'd like feedback on buffing embargo or even buffing the Sova at all before this is pursued further...

I recognize this; both of them offer the same bonus, but with different purpose.  We can still compare them for what similarities they do have, however.  The fact is that ADA has a certain "shock" value, and my entire point was that scramble needs to have a better shock value.  Until the full cooldown has expired, scramble is strictly inferior.  The only thing I took from that comparison was that the cooldown of scramble needs to be constant or reduced at each level to help that shock value.




Ever seen an enforcer-based fleet with overseers and Skirantras in support?  Vasari do have longevity, it's just people don't use those units.  Occasionally I've pulled it off, and if it wasn't for the exorbitant lab costs it's actually a pretty good rush strategy because of that incredible staying power.

If we can get a buff in to help Vasari's non-phase missile units, this could go mainstream.  I'd love to see a defensive Vasari build as opposed to the current "phase missile grim reaper" we have prowling right now.




You were looking strictly at their theoretical maximum numbers, not the time it takes to build up those numbers.  It's not that you overlooked it, it's that you never considered that metric in particular.



It's a tad stronger than level 2 scramble is right now.  I have the same doubts as you, and I'm just not sure whether I've hit the nail on the head.  It's definitely something that needs extensive testing, because this is a very finicky ability that can be too strong or too weak on a hair trigger.

I was mulling over going for 2/4/6 maximum, which would mean a cooldown of 30 seconds for a duration of 60.  The problem is, I'm just not sure if that would be too weak (especially at level 1).  This ability definitely needs some serious testing, and I don't want to see it over-nerfed.

ADA really hit the nail on the head with its 1.18 buff.  The Halcyon's abilities became perfectly balanced between each other, all of them fulfilling a meaningful role without overshadowing each other.  You can argue the Halcyon became too strong overall, but there's no question its abilities are perfectly in line with each other.  I want to do the same thing with the Skirantra... and ideally every capital ship in the game.



Tinkering with its antimatter cost is definitely the way to fine-tune this ability if we get fairly close.  I'd be of mind to do some iterative testing to find the sweet spot.

Still, 45/50/55 are reasonable numbers.



Keep in mind that this is antimatter that might be used towards other abilities, so the Skirantra (particularly higher level ones) is still losing out and has to do an antimatter trade-off.  

This is very true, repair cloud is a good ability and actually has great synergy with scramble bombers since it repairs SC...

I'm most inclined to go with 45/50/55...but if this puts too much pressure on using repair cloud, then 40/45/50 should work out fine...a max of 7.5 squadrons isn't a problem for me, so long as it doesn't last forever...either way, I think this is close to the sweet spot...

You are right about enforcers + overseers...those things can be absolute tanks to kill (well, at least the first few anyway)...a defensive-oriented Vasari fleet would be rather interesting and actually quite refreshing to see...

Double post, sorry, I am getting tired of "Forums Go Boom"....

I think after this proposed scramble change, Skirantra and Halcyon should be about equal.  On the topic of the Halcyon, I've said repeatedly that I think the Halcyon is the bar against which all other capital ships should be balanced, and I still stand by that.  If we get scramble into a "sweet spot", I think the Skirantra will be perfectly in line with the Halcyon, and the one I'd look at is the Sova.

Now, the hard part about the Sova is that it's strong early and weak late.  Early-on I have no problems putting it on equal footing with the Skirantra and Halcyon (a tad stronger, even!), but later on it just doesn't scale well.  A complete lack of fleet support abilities doesn't help at all.  But we can't buff it, either, because right now it's perfectly on par in the early game and we'd be pushing it over the edge!  I just don't know what to do about the Sova.

One possibility is to give the "missiles platforms" access to some special abilities on the tech tree so the Sova improves as you tech up.  The obvious one is the cluster warhead of the Javelis LRM, but I think we can find something better from the defense tree.  The TEC turret gets two abilities; a short-range area of effect missile burst and a long-range armour-piercing cannon.  These upgrades would work very well for the missile turret, and since they're fairly high on the tech tree and useless for a rusher, we can be assured they won't be seen till later.  However, this doesn't solve the problem on its own, and I just don't know what to do about the Sova's long-term prospects.


Now, as for colony capital ships, I'm actually thinking of a speed buff.  Right now all capital ships have the same move speed except the colony capital ships, which are slower for some reason.  Especially if we intend to buff everything else, I see no reason to continue this.  Aside from that change, I wouldn't touch the Progen at all.  I might see a minor buff to ion bolt and/or targeting uplink on the Akkan, but otherwise keep it as is.

The Jarrasul just needs a buff to its colonization ability.  I've heard countless different suggestions, from free turrets to negating underdevelopment tax for a few minutes.  It definitely needs something economic.  I wouldn't touch any of its other abilities, though a weapon damage buff (it's currently way below the Progen and Akkan in that regard) wouldn't hurt.

If the Sova is equal to the Halcyon and Skirantra early on (or perhaps more powerful), then buffing embargo isn't going to work, so I say that probably should be scrapped...the lvl 6 ability could be buffed, but I don't think that's the best option for buffing a late game sova...

One thing that could be done is to make higher levels of missile batteries more powerful...instead of making individual missile batteries more powerful, allow more of them to accumulate....higher level sovas would become more useful because their higher antimatter capacity and higher regeneration rates would allow continuous production of missile batteries to go on for longer...and, buffing this ability I think would be the best choice for making successive Sova's almost just as good as the first...

Currently, all levels of missile batters cost 70 antimatter, have a cooldown of 35, and a duration of 180...the only difference between them is that the missile batteries become more powerful...

Since missile batteries aren't mobile, don't have PMs, and can be shot down by anything, I'm not worried about accumulating a lot of them like I would with scramble bombers...

Looking at just cooldown and duration, you can get 5 of these things up at any one time...the problem I see with these is the lack of shock value...35 seconds is just too long, and 5 isn't very many (lvl 3 gives a battery like 21 DPS...five of those is 105 DPS, which is less than 6 HCs)...a lvl x Sova can regenerate 27+3x (approximate equation) antimatter in those 35 seconds...a lvl 5 Sova has 390 antimatter, so it could use missile batteries for over 8 solid minutes if it isn't using embargo...the problem isn't the sova's ability to use missile batteries continuously, but that it can't get out more than 5 at any given time...

My feeling is, allow the ability to accumulate more batteries at a given time...instead of a cooldown of 35, how about 35/30/25?  That makes for 5/6/7 accumulated at a given point in time...in addition, reduce the antimatter cost to keep antimatter consumed per second constant...right now it is 2 antimatter/sec, so make the antimatter costs 70/60/50...

Of the three carriers, I am least experienced with the Sova, and I don't want to make it too overpowered...I'm thinking that improving missile batteries is the best course of action to help higher level Sovas...

I propose that missile batteries have the cooldown changed from 35 to 35/30/25, allowing 5/6/7 batteries to be accumulated at a given point in time instead of just 5...in addition, antimatter cost of 70 will be changed to 70/60/50...

I think that your philosophy on making all three abilities good, comparable choices is a good one...and right now, I'm thinking Heavy SC is a little weak, and might be picked on successive sovas only because embargo doesn't stack...

I propose that Heavy SC be changed from increasing SC armor by 2/3.5/5 to 2/4/6...in addition, damage bonus be increased from 12%/24%/36% to 15%/30%/45%...

I think that, since it only affects a limited amount of SC (most likely no more than 6 squadrons) and TEC SC are already the weakest, this ability will be more powerful, but not too powerful...also, its scaled more for higher level sovas, as lvl 1 gives the same armor and only an extra 3% to physical damage, but by lvl 3, you're looking at an extra point in armor and a full extra 9% to physical damage...

Combining these two buffs, low level sovas are going to be about the same, but higher level sovas are going to be a bit more powerful, and successive sovas will become more useful since the buffed abilities stack (unlike embargo)...

 

You are when that Sova is sitting next to your homeworld bombarding it!

This was a big strategy in 1.181; build two Sovas, park 'em next to the enemy homeworld, and throw down a bunch of missile platforms.  Very hard to stop if it's well played.

 

That could work, giving it more punch at the highest levels.  Of course, this still doesn't solve the problem that in the late game the Sova is a warrior when what we need is a general (or at very least an artillery gunner like the Marza).

 

 

 

I agree with you that the Progenitor is fine as is...

The Akkan I have a problem with...

Its colonize ability is great (the best of the three colonize abilities) and doesn't need any more work...it's the other two abilities I have a problem with...targeting uplink doesn't stack, and there's not much point in having multiple ships with colonize, so successive akkans really only contribute an extra ion bolt and a back up in case the first akkan is destroyed (which is a sad reason to have a 2nd akkan)...

I may consider buffing targeting uplink, but unless the ability is radically changed in its effects, I don't know if much can be done with it...increasing chance to hit I don't think really does all that much, and as far as I know, lvl 3 targeting uplink is good enough to help attack/defend SBs better...and again, this ability doesn't stack...

Therefore, its my feeling that ion bolt needs to be buffed by a fair amount to make successive akkans more useful (and in my opinion its a weak ability in the first place)...it makes sense not to have a whole horde of akkans, but I wouldn't have a problem with 2 or 3 of them actually being a viable strategy...

Currently, ion bolt costs 85 antimatter...its duration is 3/5/7 and its cooldown is 10/12/14...

A lvl x akkan has 225 + 35x antimatter...at lvl 3 ion bolt, a lvl 5 akkan is going to regenerate 17.5 antimatter per use of ion bolt...that means ion bolt lvl 3 essentially costs 67.5 antimatter per use...with its 400 antimatter, a lvl 5 akkan is going to be able to use ion bolt about 6 times (with a delay on the sixth shot)...that is probably more than enough to kill any capital ship trying to escape, but odds are, you're only going to be able to take out one...this ability is only useful when a high priority target is trying to escape...during combat, even with lvl 3 ion bolt you're only going to be able to disable a ship of your choosing for half of 84 seconds, which is simply not good enough...that ship is going to still be able to squeeze out its abilities, and if the enemy tries to flee, you might not have enough antimatter to prevent an enemy cap from retreating in time...

With level 1 or 2 ion bolt, the situation is even worse...to the point where I'd say its a pitiful ability until lvl 3...

Now, if you add in TEC antimatter regeneration bonus due to culture, suddenly this ability is going to be used more often and lvl 3 serves its purpose extremely well...but even still, lvl 1 and 2 are rather weak, and on offensive actions this ability is not only pretty worthless, but you likely won't have friendly culture...

I'd like to see two changes to ion bolt...one, make lvl 1 and 2 more useful while keeping lvl 3 about the same....two, make this ability much useful during combat, not just when the enemy is fleeing...the tricky part is making this ability more useful during combat but not any better at trapping enemy caps while they are trying to flee...

As for the Jarrasul, I agree that only its colonize ability needs to be buffed...

I'm tired and its late, so I will think about ion bolt and the jarrasul's colonize ability later...nevertheless, I'm open to suggestions....

 

 

Does this mean the proposed buff to the Sova is too powerful?  We're looking at least at lvl 5 or 6 sovas...its gonna take a while before these things are popping out 7 missile batteries continuously...nevertheless, if Sova rushes become too powerful, then the whole point of rebalancing just went out the window...

I suppose the bombardment DPS of the Sova could be taken down a notch...not so much because of missile batteries, but because of the power of a sova rush on a HW using lvl 2 or 3 embargo...

I agree that the other capital ships need a buff, but I think that the division here is those that like carriers versus those that dislike them. Privately, I feel that capital ships need a boost and that everything else is fine as is.

However, I think that the Vasari position is fine relative to the other sides. I remember when the Advent used to pawn and the Vasari needed help compared to them. I think that the current situation is closer to a real balance. Somehow, I suspect that this is going to be as close to balance as we're going to get.

Level 3 targeting uplink is very good both for attacking starbases and supporting starbases.  A starbase with level 3 uplink outranges Ogrovs, which really makes countering starbases much more difficult for a TEC opponent.  LRM's with targeting uplink outrange standard starbase weapons, enabling them to attack enemy starbases with impunity.  And - this is one of the most juicy - Ogrovs with targeting uplink outrange meteor control on the Transcencia, one of the few true counters to a fully upgraded Advent starbase.  Turrets also benefit from this ability, outranging LRF that normally would be able to just shoot at them with impunity.  Great tactical ability, highly underrated, but as you mention it doesn't stack so there's no point to having more than one in a single group.

Negating miss chance is mostly useful for flak frigates and boosts their damage against strike craft.  It's pretty good if you're fighting in asteroid fields or against a Rapture, but those are less common scenarios.  I find the range boost to have the higher utility.




Don't underestimate ion bolt.  It's the only "no strings attached" interrupt in the game.  I've knocked out more capital ships with ion bolt than with any other ability.  Remember, this ability also knocks out the speed of the enemy capital ship, forcing them to accelerate from a standstill every time it's used.  This actually dwarfs down-time in terms of its effects on your escape.  Because this effect does not improve as ion bolt levels up, it's actually the reverse of what you think; ion bolt is strongest at level 1 and its level 2 and 3 upgrades are largely unnecessary.  Don't view ion bolt as a disabling ability.  It's an interrupt first and foremost.

If anything is going to happen to ion bolt, perhaps the best choice would be to add some damage to it.  Just a thought.



That's the problem with Sovas!  They're excellent rushers right now, so any buff that helps their rush game could push them over the edge.  Because what we want to target is their late game performance, I'm leaning towards improving the Sova via the technology tree.

I actually recommended lowering the bombard damage of all carrier capital ships a while back.  This would mean that you wouldn't be able to bombard effectively with these guys and you'd either need another capital ship or siege frigates, an equalizing effect for the fact that you're at a big disadvantage without a carrier capital ship.  I'm just not sure if it's the right effect to go for.

The only problem I have with buffing the Sova through the TEC tree is that it would be the only ship in the game to be buffed as such...using technologies already in the game (your idea with the gauss upgrades like meson bolt and rocket burst is good) might work, but it doesn't reward you for having a high level sova...it rewards you for having a high level sova and researching one or two techs...

A lvl 5 Sova is only going to have one lvl 3 ability at most (and likely it'll be embargo), so its not truly high level...

Once you get to lvl 6, you have access to a very powerful ability...not the greatest for direct combat bonuses, but the industrial boost is very nice (allows a kodiak in 7 seconds, that's pretty impressive)...by this point, when we're looking to buff the later levels, you already have a solid ultimate ability, and embargo lvl 3 is great...

Higher level Sovas will have at least 2 lvl 3 abilities...I think missile batteries and Heavy SC only need a slight boost, and one that favors the higher levels a tad more....it doesn't make the Sova the true support ship that the Halcyon and Skirantra are, but then again, the Sova never was given support abilities to start with...it simply is not a true support ship, it is a direct combat ship (missile batteries/heavy SC) and economic weapon (embargo/rapid manufacturing)...I think it fits the TEC well, and just needs a little late game boosting...

A sova may not end up being as good of a late game choice as a halcyon or skirantra, but it is just as good of a choice early game (with a nerfed skirantra, at least) and this is what is most important because the early game is so crucial...by the late game, if the sova is a little weaker than the halcyon and skirantra but the TEC makes up for it with a different cap ship, then I think all will be fine...

The ships can't be perfectly balanced, but they can be close, and most importantly the carriers and colonizers need to be equal in the early game...late game, what's important is that each faction's capital ships balance as a whole with the other two factions...

Right now I'm thinking I'm going to go with the buff to missile batteries (accumulate 5/6/7) and heavy SC (15%/30%/45%)...it won't affect the sova's early performance, and will only make higher level sovas more powerful...if it just doesn't seem to be enough, I will definitely consider the tech upgrades for the missile batteries...that is a creative idea and if implemented properly would work out real well...my feeling is, rocket burst and meson bolt could be too powerful if 5 batteries were allowed to accumulate, so something else would have to be changed then...

Reducing the planet bombing of carriers is actually not a bad idea, given how powerful they are for rushing...I was thinking that, once the caps are all balanced (by which 13 of them are buffed), it might be best to reduce the bombardment DPS of all caps save the planet bombers....this would indirectly make revelations and vulkorases more useful (Marza's too, but they are useful enough)...

The Sova increases in power as it levels up; I don't have any problems there.  My problem with the Sova is - regardless of its level - that it doesn't scale well into the late game.  The level 1 Sova needs this buff every big as much as the level 5 or the level 7.  


I often go for a missile platform/heavy strike craft build.  Embargo is great, but sometimes you want to raise your Sova to be a brawler.


I'd agree; without completing reworking at least one of its abilities, we aren't going to get it to scale into the late game as gracefully as the Halcyon and Skirantra, period.


This would be a problem if fleets are small, but for larger fleets that are commonplace in the late game, that's not the case.  You could easily have 40 or 50 Javelis LRM before you even have enough labs to get meson bolt, and even if you accumulate the full 5 batteries (good luck with that if your enemy has 40 or 50 LRF of his own...) that's only a 10% boost on your fleet's damage output, something you can get from other caps passively.



I wouldn't nerf the bombard damage of battleships or support capital ships.  Carriers sure, colony caps maybe, but no one else needs this.  The Vulkoras and Marza are already awe-inspiring bombard weapons compared to other capital ships in the game, and the Revelation is the only one that has trouble with its role.

As for the akkan...you bring up good points about its interrupt ability...I've always felt that lvl 3 and 2 were a big step above lvl 1, though the difference between the cooldown and duration is 7s for all three levels...so a ship's ability to escape really doesn't change if its in position to jump...

I feel like something needs to be done with ion bolt to make it just a little bit more powerful, but I'm not sure where...I originally was thinking lvl 1 and 2 needed a buff, but now I'm not certain, perhaps its lvl 2 and 3 that need a boost...dealing some damage (like EMP) would make it more powerful, but I feel that would be changing the intent of the ability instead of refining and balancing it...

As for the Jarrasul's colonize ability...

The Vasari have a theme with speed when it comes to developing a planet...they have technology to speed up population growth, and one to speed up construction rates (which the Jarrasul already does)...they also have technology to reduce the credit cost of (IIRC) all purchases...

I have 3 ideas with the Jarrasul's colonize ability...

1) Increase the production speed of planet upgrades

2) Increase the population growth of the planet

3) Decrease the cost of orbital structures

From a conceptual level, #2 makes the most sense (the evacuator has what, 15,000 people on it?)...but there is a technology to already do this...I also don't know if the economic boost would be that significant unless the growth rate was ridiculous, and even then, it would very much be tied to the type of planet being colonized....

#1 is okay, but its too much like the current colonize ability...it simply doesn't provide a solid, tangible economic boost (aside from underdevelopment not lasting quite as long)

I am most in favor of #3...depending on how much of a cost decrease there is, it could be in conjunction with the current construction speed bonus or could replace the current speed bonus...

With each level of the akkan's colonize, you get a free extractor....that's 250 credits right there....

At level 1, you get 1 extractor (250) and you get it instantly...so, that is at least 36 extra seconds you are getting that extractors resources (.46*36=16.56... convert to credits (2.5:1) and thats 41.3)...so just with the extra extractors, akkan's colonize 1/2/3 is essentially worth 291/624/998 credits...add on the extraction bonuses of 33%/66%/100% that last for 6 minutes and that is 138 extra credits per level per extractor...

There is some variance with how quickly your constructors can move and start building extractors as well as how many roids are at the planet, but a very rough estimate puts colonize 1/2/3 at about 705/1452/2240 (assumes 3 roids, and that all are instantly built)...this is an overestimate, but it also doesn't take into account the value of time (you can work on turrets or factories or whatever sooner)...

As for the progenitor, you get a 15%/30%/45% cost reduction on planet upgrades for 360/480/600 seconds...

In that time period, lets say you build on average two civilian upgrades and two logistics upgrade...those would normally cost 2000-650-430 or (2.5:1 conversion ratio) or 4700 credits...

Therefore, on average colonize 1/2/3 would save you 705/1410/2115...again, probably an overestimate (obviously asteroids cost less and 2 logistic upgrades may be pushing it)...these numbers are fairly comparable to the akkan, so I think that the Jarrasul's ability needs to be comparable to both of these colonize abilities...

Right now all three colonize abilities last at least 6 minutes...progenitors lvl 3 last 10 and the jarrasuls always lasts 12...

Lets stick with the current 720s duration for the jarrasul, and work on reducing the cost of structures...

What would you build in 720s?  Probably a lot...let's go with 3 extractors, a frigate factory, 2 trade ports, and 2 repair bays...the total cost for all of those things is 3650-480-480 or (2.5:1 conversion ratio) 6050 credits...

If the Jarrasul's colonize ability reduced construction costs by 12%/24%/36%, that would save you 726/1452/2178 credits...this is comparable economically to the other two colonize abilities, yet I think is different enough...if this were done, then I don't think the Jarrasul should increase the construction speed...

I'm going to need some help here, because I don't have the experience that some of you do...my estimates for how much you will build in 12 minutes etc etc might be off, in which case the percentages for the jarrasul's ability would be off as well...

Right now, I'm thinking it should be 12%/24%/36% for 720s...however, depending in which direction my estimates are off, 10%/20%/30% or 15%/30%/45% may be more appropriate...

As for Missile batteries...

What about putting cluster warheads (the LRMs ability) on the missile batteries?  Not as powerful as meson bolt or rocket burst, but its something...

In fact, the entity file of cluster warheads could be copied and renamed to make a new ability that would just be put on missile batteries...this way, it wouldn't be tied to the tech tree (which I'm sketchy on)...

The advantage of cluster warheads (or a similar splash damage ability) is that it scales as the game progresses...as fleets get bigger and bigger, splash damage and AoE abilities become exponentially more powerful...

I think a splash damage like effect on these things could give them the late game power they need....

 

One logistic upgrade is pushing it; early-game, you have more than enough logistics to go around and meet your needs for labs and factories, and these upgrades are simply unnecessary.

I'd say a good 90% of the time, I won't buy anything other than the bare minimum population upgrades on colonization.  I'd say the asteroid case with only one upgrade is actually more common than a planet you'd invest 3+ upgrades on immediately.  The problem is that the basic logistics offering (2 per planet) is more than sufficient for early-game needs.  If I'm a front-liner and not going trade, I might never buy a single logistics upgrade all game.

I'm still not certain on how to deal with the Jarrasul's colonize.



I considered that one as well; my only concern is that it's within reach of an early-game TEC with a large number of LRM.  On the other hand, rocket burst isn't going to do anything for your rush other than boost your missile platforms.

I looked at the three colonize abilities again...

This time I was more precise and I did multiple situations....

Let's assume you are colonizing both the asteroid and the ice/volcanic by your HW (allegiance=90%)...let's also assume that one has 2 asteroids while the other has 3 asteroids...this isn't perfect, since the average asteroid count is just under three and the second planet your cap colonizes probably is two, not one jump away from your HW, but this is close enough...

With some more precise math, the Akkan's colonize 1/2/3 will net you 703/1623/2703 on a planet with 3 asteroids and 618/1415/1661 on a planet with only 2 asteroids...this assumes that on average it takes a constructor 20s to get to the first asteroid, then 20 to the next one and so on...

Let's assume that on the asteroid, you build 1 civilian upgrade and 1 logistics upgrade...on the ice/volcanic, let's assume you build 2 civilian upgrades and 1 logistics upgrade...with a Progenitor, its colonize 1/2/3 will net you 499/998/1497 on the ice/volcanic and 304/608/912 on the asteroid...

There are a lot of variables to consider, so this won't be perfect, but lets assume on average the Akkan is colonizing something with 3 asteroids...lets also assume, on average, the Progenitor is colonizing a planet (colony ships are more likely to be used on asteroids due to the smaller militia)...

The Akkan is netting about 700/1600/2700 and the Progenitor is netting about 500/1000/1500...

My feeling is, of the colonizing caps, the Progenitor is the most powerful combat-wise while the Akkan is the least combat oriented, with the Jarrasul somewhere in the middle...

As for their colonize ability, the akkan has the best...it seems fair that, if you have the best colonize ability you should be the worst combat ship of the three...like-wise, if the Progenitor is the best combat-wise, then its only fair that its colonize ability is the weakest...

So, my goal is to put the Jarrasul's colonize ability somewhere between the Akkan's and the Progenitor's...I'm going to shoot for its colonize 1/2/3 to net 600/1300/2100...

What will, on average, be built at a planet in 12 minutes (720s)?  My guess is 3 extractors, 1 lab, 1 factory, 1 trade module, and 2 repair bays...now, this is very debatable, but I think this setup is close...a frontline planet may have 2 factories and no labs...a core world might have no factory and 2 labs...you may build 3 or 4 repair bays, you may build none...also, you might build turrets to clean up militia (likely 1,2, or 3)...these setups are different, but 1 lab is about the same cost as a factory and 2 repair bays is close to the cost of 3 turrets...bottom line, I think most setups are going to cost more or less the same...

The setup I have chosen costs about 5838 credits....to net 600/1300/2100, we'd need cost reductions of 11%/22%/36%...

Therefore, I am going to stay with my proposal of changing the Jarrasul's colonize ability to reduce the costs of orbital structures...the reductions will be 12%/24%/36% and the duration will remain 720s...

Unless the concept of reducing structure costs comes out to be a really bad idea or my estimates are really poor, I think I'm going to stay with these numbers...

 

Now, back to missile batteries...

Cluster warheads currently works as such...

The range of the splash damage is only 1200m, but the real limiting factor is the max targets, which is 6...it also does 10 damage as splash damage, which I assume is mitigated by shields...

My feeling is, apply these mechanics to missile batteries, but don't use the actual ability cluster warheads..

The ability could have a cooldown time, but these things aren't lasting very long, so I'm thinking it would be better to make it a passive ability or inherent characteristic of the batter...in this manner, the cooldown time would basically be the weapon cooldown...

Since cluster warheads has been around for a long time and doesn't seem to be overpowered, I say keep the range of 1200m and damage at 10...this ability will be passive so it will always be active, making it more powerful than cluster warheads (which has a cooldown of 60s), but is also only isolated to missile batteries (which can only accumulate up to 5)...

The current duration of missile batteries is 180, and the cooldown time on its weapons is 11/9.9/8.8 at lvl 1/2/3, so the splash damage, even if passive, will only have 16/18/20 instances...to scale the power of this, the max targets I think should be 6/12/18...this will result in 5.3/12/20 extra DPS per missile battery...currently the DPS of a lvl 1/2/3 missile battery is 13/17.3/22.75, so the percent increase in DPS will be 41%/69%/88%...

Five missile batteries can accumulate, so at lvl 1/2/3 that is 65/87/114 DPS...with this proposed buff, that will become 92/147/214 DPS...that's essentially the same DPS increase as 9 LRMs at lvl 3, which is powerful...however, this is all splash damage, so it won't make these missile batteries better at taking out individual targets...a lot of this damage is going to be negated by shield regeneration at first, but overtime a continuous use of lvl 2 or 3 missile batteries is going to add up...

To sum it up, I'm heavily considering implementing splash damage on missile batteries....the max # of targets will be 6/12/18 and the damage per target will be 10; range will be 1200m...this will result in 27/60/100 extra DPS from 5 accumulated missile batteries, which is equivalent to about 2.5/5.5/9 extra LRMs...

In conjuction with this, I think it would be good to buff heavy SC from 2/3.5/5 extra armor and 12%/24%/36% extra damage to 2/4/6 extra armor and 15%/30%/45% extra damage...

I don't think this will make the Sova too powerful...embargo is left untouched, and lvl 1 Heavy SC and Missile Batteries aren't all that much better...the more powerful lvl 2 and 3 Heavy SC and Missile batteries should make the Sova more comparable to the Halcyon and Skirantra...

The only problem right now is how to implement splash damage on the missile batteries...I'm not a mod expert so I'm not 100% certain this is possible without creating a new ability...

Update on changes made...since this thread is getting long...

Skirantra:

Scramble Bombers 1/2/3 releases 1/2/3 bomber squadrons per use

Duration = 60s

Cooldown = 24s

Antimatter cost = 45/50/55

Sova:

Heavy Strikecraft increases the armor and damage output of the host’s strikecraft

Armor increase = 2/4/6

Physical damage increase = 15%/30%/45%

Missile Batteries instantly constructs a missile platform

Cooldown = 35/30/25

This should fix scramble bombers and make it reasonable...not OP, and not too nerfed...

After comparing Heavy SC to ADA, I think these new numbers (up from 2/3.5/5 armor and 12%/24%/36%) will make it a bit more competitive while not too powerful early on...the new cooldown on missile batteries (used to be 35 at all levels) will allow 5/6/7 to accumulate instead of just 5, but the antimatter cost will not be changed...higher level sovas will have more antimatter and faster regeneration so I really don't think reducing the antimatter cost is a good idea...

The Halcyon and Progenitor I think are fine as is...I'm also leaning towards not changing the Akkan either...targeting uplink or ion bolt could see some improvement, but both have their uses and I don't think there is a good way to buff them without overpowering them or radically changing them...even later when colonize isn't important, the other two abilities still are very useful, enough to always have at least one akkan around...

The current issue is the Jarrasul...I'm having a hard time reducing structure costs with it since the tags that do this are not "entity" but "research"...so, if this problem can't be solved then I'm just going to work with the ability as is...most likely, the structure speed will be change from 20% to either 50% or 100% (which either one doubles construction speed, can't remember if the bonus increases construction speed or reduces time needed)...each level of colonize would extend how long the bonus lasts...

With the Jarrasul being the only one unfinished, I am moving onto the three battleships, the Kortul, Kol, and Radiance...I'm going to study the abilities some, and then report back with propositions...obviously the Kortul is going to need the least work, while the Kol is going to need the most...preliminary thoughts are to buff disruptive strikes, reduce antimatter costs on the kol abilities, and buff energy absorption/animosity on the radiance...

 

This is basically no buff at all.  Most people play on fast or fastest game speed, and at those speeds construction time is already very reasonable and it's the construction frigate's move speed in getting from one construction site to the next that's the prime factor.  The best way to improve this ability if you just want to further boost construction time is to have it spawn an extra (temporary) construction frigate.  Beyond that fact, I feel we need a monetary boost, but I just don't know what that boost should be.

I think the best way to go about this is to give a universal buff to battleships, increasing their damage and durability somewhat to give them more early-game punch to match what the carrier caps can do.  If you hand out such a buff, the Kortul is perfectly fine as is.  You could do some tweaking, but I wouldn't improve it very much.

Now, the Radiance's detonate antimatter is a perfectly fine ability currently, and its passive armour is fine as is.  The first real problem is that cleansing brilliance is a fairly mediocre ultimate, but this can probably just get a few minor buffs and we'd be done with it.  Where this capital ship needs real work is with animosity, the only ability so completely without worth that I think it needs to be completely reworked from scratch.

The Kol's biggest problem is antimatter.  The other two battleships have very antimatter efficient abilities that have long staying power with little cost.  The Kortul's abilities have long durations so you don't need to use them very often, and their low, low antimatter cost makes them very effective.  The Radiance doesn't need to spam detonate antimatter at all and with proper pacing can keep using it pretty well indefinitely.  The Kol on the other hand is a hog that runs out of antimatter before you can blink and (most importantly) before it gets the job done.  High-level Kols with good antimatter regeneration are awesome, but low-level Kols without the benefit of these upgrades are pretty well worthless.

First off is the gauss railgun.  At 75 antimatter, this ability simply does not pack enough punch.  At level one, 325 damage every 6 seconds works out to a mere 55 dps (before mitigation); I can get that from five Javelis LRM's, and it won't cost me 75 antimatter every 6 seconds.  The theoretical maximum damage isn't even that good; it works out to 19/39/57 dps after mitigation.  At level 1, this is worse than nano disassemblers, which is shield bypass, packs a deadly debuff, and is a long-duration debuff requiring only a single application in most cases.  It's only a tad higher than the (also unmitigated) damage from detonate antimatter on the radiance, which has the secondary effect of completely shutting down the target.  This ability needs serious help; it's supposed to be a "shock" ability that can throw out a lot of damage in a short time, but the Kol simply doesn't have the antimatter reserves to use it enough times to matter.

Then we have Flak Burst, an ability that actually does pack enough damage to kill.  Unfortunately, it has the same issue with antimatter and you'll run dry before it gets the job done.  Higher level Kols with better antimatter reserves and maxed out flak burst can handle this, but lower level ones simply don't and you need two Kols to do what one should be able to.

Adaptive Forcefields would be pretty decent if it didn't cost antimatter.  Its cost is pretty reasonable as is, but on a capital ship that's already starving for antimatter, this ability really doesn't perform well enough.  A 35% damage reduction is pretty slick, but it won't save you if you've got 500 dps in LRF pounding on you.  For ability whose sole purpose is to keep the Kol alive on a faction with few real ways to counter late-game focus fire, that just won't suffice.

Finest Hour is the saving grace of the Kol, giving it the antimatter regeneration to actually use its abilities, but a capital ship that needs to wait until level 6 to finally become worthwhile is a capital ship I can't afford to use most of the time.