Arthanis

[quote]@Arthanis: I support most of your suggestions there.. I am still against SC increases as I want that to be a carrier's area of expertise. I am not for the AM decrease on GRG either, but from what I can tell, I agree on the other ones.[/quote] 1. Caps are not specialized, they are "carrier cap", "battlecruiser" only because they ae slightly better in one job then other caps. Nothing justify one ship being super-specialized in one job (excluding colonizers) and keepin

Proposed Capship changes: Capital Battleships: Kol Battleship: - Health increased to 3200 (from 3000) - Shields increased to 1400 (from 1250) - Beam DPS increased to 14.0 (from 9.0) - Laser DPS increased to 13.25 (from 8.25) - Armor increased to 6 (from 5) - Max number of strikecrafts increased to 3 (from 2) - Railguns: Antimatter cost decreased to 30 (from 75) - Railguns: Cooldown increased to 12 (from 6) <b

[quote]The problem with your idea is that Illums are suppose to charge into the fray to be able to use all three beam attacks.[/quote] The problem are Ilums which are OP because they hve too many roles and are cost-effectively countering too many things. Choosing between safe attack range and 3 beam with reduced accuracy sounds fair, Advent have enough options to fill all holes.

If LRF are supossed to be counter to everything in game, there is no reason of balance discusion. Anyway, what do you think of my idea?

[quote]Then what counters LF?[/quote] Caps? SC? HC? [quote] The only counter to LF currently is LRF.[/quote] Then what counters LRF?

Idea: LRF have 50% reduced accuracy at 50% of their max range and below Lore: targeting systems have problems with attacking close opponents Balance: - It will significanlty reduce short-range effectiveness of LRF and will force players using them too keep optimal range. - LF/Caps/HC at close range are real opponent to even massed LRFs - mindless LRF spam no longer work vs smart o

Idea: LRF have 50% reduced accuracy at 50% of their max range and below Lore: targeting systems have problems with attacking close opponents Balance: - It will significanlty reduce short-range effectiveness of LRF and will force players using them too keep optimal range. - LF/Caps/HC at close range are real opponent to even massed LRFs - mindless LRF spam no longer work vs smart opponent - it will promote micro

Thats why I suggest increasing number of SC on support Caps to 5. Support caps are atm caps with no purpose (because other caps are usually better in everything including supporting fleet), giving them better SC armament will at least make them decent in SOMETHING. Of course DPS/HP/SH increase and abilities buff in addition to SC increase will be nice too.

Making capships worth their cost >>> making capships cheaper - my 5 cents :)

[quote]Arthanis- Adding extra squads will not help the other cap ships, because their weakness to them isnt in the late game, its starting off where 2 lvl 1 carrier caps can provide 6-8 squads. Your proposed solution would not work because 2 of any other cap ship would still only provide 2 squads at lvl 1, which would still be dominated by the carrier caps. Darvin suggestion of increasing AM regen on carriers would help because a carrier or 2 would be able to keep up production of SC to fight

First of all I hink carrier caps are far too superior in terms of SC... Pure numbers: Skinatra has max 8 squadrons + 6 given by Scramble bombers = 14 SC at 10 level Halycon has max 11 squadrons + lvl6 ability increasing effective number of squadrons by ~5 = ~16 SC max at 10 level Sova has 8 SC max, but have ability increasing their overall effectiveness by ~30% = effective number of SC is ~10-11 squadrons CarrierCaps in terms of armor and damage are jus

Caps should be definitely more useful in general. Game should be much more capship oriented. Strategies using caps as support should be significantly more rewarding then strategies using pure frigates. Capships should be natural core of almost every attack group. Why? Capships are extremely expensive in terms of both resources and control points, they need multiple different upgrades (including weapons upgrades from at least 2 different weapon trees) to max their stats, they are forced to gai

[quote]I keep hearing this from people. It sounds like an emotional argument to me, not a rational one. If this isn't an emotional kneejerk reaction, then tell me the rational reason why you are against a damage cap. I haven't heard one yet.[/quote] "Caps should get butterfly wings and should eat each other" "no, they shouldn't - it is 100% unrealistic and against balance" "it sounds like emotional argument" Damage cap is bad idea. If you atta

more damage dealt = more damage done (NO to damage cap). Max mitigation increase is better idea by far, but it is still not enough to make some caps as useful as carriercaps/colonycaps are.

[quote]Unless of course we took the course of AF being passive... That way, all AM would be devoted to offensive abilities.[/quote] Even if it happen, GRG are still underpowered, overpriced ability.

Caps are not UP is large-scale battles only... But I like this (max mitigation increase) buff anyway.

[quote]Marza MB is no longer an OP ability, Advent can negate most of the damage with a progen shield restore, can stop it with reverie or detonate AM. Vasari bombers can bypass shields and mitigation, can survive it with repair clouds, or shut it down with Phase out hull and possibly disruptive strikes.[/quote] It was just counter-argument to people who don't want to buff caps because of "invincible lvl6 marza", you don't need to convince me. My point is "thing A shoul

[quote]@Arthanis: it depends. It depends on what you say the problem is. I say the problem is that the Kol and GRG are underused because of a lack of a purpose for them. You say that they are UP because of high AM costs. That is where we differ. I think that it should remain more or less the same minus damage/an effect as that would still allow GRG+FF to work. Honestly, the Kol is an AM hog. We agree there completely. However I believe that the

How specialized different caps are? IMO not much. In "specialized" world: - Battleship should be only one ship able to deal and take huge damage (while differences betwen different classes are not drastic) - Carrier should be only one with real SC potential (it is mostly truth... bot only this one point) - Colonizers should be completely focused on colonization (again - not truth. Some of their combat abilities are more powerful then comb

I hate all ideas of damage caps. It is both unrealistic and against balance at all. Fix broken interactions between unit clases instead of creating artificial solutions like this. Just buff caps. There are many ways of doing it: - buffing damage - buffing hp/shields - increasing number of SC - buffing abilities - buffing attack behaviour (number of targets per bank, attack fange etc.) - changeing armor value

Even after this "overbuff" Kols railgun cannot even negate Kortul Power Surge (don't forget of PS attack acceleration)... Kol is still the most mana depending Battleship by far. And only one battleship without ANY antimatter negating ability...

[quote]Extremely overpowered as the TEC eco advantage helps them get 2 Kols early on and get them up to level 3. THe combined firepower of this will kill any capships withen 10 seconds.[/quote] How? Even if you have 2 Kols with level 2 Railguns you have only extra 2x66DPS (until depleting antimnatter...)... which is affected by both armor and mitigation. I am suggesting both huge damage increase AND huge cooldown increase. Notice: total railguns DPS (damage/cooldo

[quote]3. Increase the power of GRG. Very generic way to fix a problem. It would likely be increased to a max of 1400-1600. This seems like quite a bit, but due to other super-weapons' abilities (such as synergies or healing), it isn't that much for something that still has to go through mitigation. Even if you kicked it all the way up to 1200/1600/2000, it still wouldn't do that much as it would still have to go through mitigation.

[quote]But then Carriers lose their edge.. I want carriers to win SC matches. However as I've said before, I don't want to buff GRG by an AM decrease.[/quote] How? Carries Caps will still have 60% more strikecrafts then support Caps and 166% more strikecrafts then other Caps + strikecraft supporting abilities... [quote]Carriers should win in the SC category.[/quote] they have 8 strikecrafts max, so they will be still superior in "SC category" Support caps will get 5 SC max (don't forg

GRG cost reduction to ~30 AM/shoot is buff. Add my idea of increasing max strikecrafts number on non-carrier caps (to 5 on support class and to 3 on Battleships and planet killers) and Kol is viable option.