| Author |
UGTO tier 3 Elite Line Destroyer |
Jhomes
Chief Marshal
Joined: June 22, 2013
Posts: 92
|  Posted: 2014-04-15 09:04
It is well known that the kluth tier 3 ravager destroyer is a great ship and is used often. The ICC tier 3 rapid assault destroyer is certainly no ravager but does such an uncharacteristic amount of damage per second that it rivals even a combat dreadnought on its best side, this makes it a terrific ship for any icc player to look forward to and is used often once attained. Now for the point, in my opinion the UGTO tier 3 Elite Line Destroyer does not even come close to comparing with the other two tier 3 destroyers. I understand the Elite Line Destroyer is not designed for combat like the other two obviously are but I cannot help but feel its redeeming abilities fall quite short in compensation. After all there is another ugto destroyer that is nearly identical just minus 4 standard chemical lasers.
Elite line destroyer has 3 heavy cannons and 6 standard chemical lasers as its only offensive weapons, its third ability lies in extra PD lasers and a scanner. Of course these could be of use esp agaisnt the missile spamming icc ships but since it is only of destroyer size its extra beams only adds a few more to the standard 2 PD beams that all destroyers have stock. One would ask why use a combat lacking destoyer when i could use a cruiser with comparable PD and far superior firepower. Because of this I have only seen this ship in the field once and it was during a quiet time and was more of a novelty than an actual use in battle. Now I do understand what they were going for when this ship was made. A small fast ship to escort and also fight alongside allies, or to fly thru heavy missile fire to attack a larger missile ship hiding in an interdictor. It just lacks the firepower to be an effective choice.
I have 3 possible solutions.
1. Remove the 6 standard chemical lasers and refit with 5 flux beams, this will allow for more appropriate attack power as well as ship disabling capabilities.
2. Double the amount of heavy particle cannons from 3 to 6 allowing for significant attack power at range as well as room for switching out some for emp cannons to disable enemy ships to further assist allies which this ship is made for.
3. Add a significant amount of armor, somthing like stock standard armor x11 or x12 instead of more firepower. This woiuld allow to better assist larger ships and remain as escort much longer even under heavy fire from both missiles and traditional projectiles.
These are just 3 possible solutions, and are only 1 persons opinion but i doubt i am the only player to feel this way and i do not even play ugto. Thanks for reading, please change ship for sake of better darkspace.
Jason
P.S. change icc sniper frigate too 
_________________
|
Forger of Destiny
Chief Marshal
We Kick Arse
Joined: October 10, 2009
Posts: 826
| Posted: 2014-04-15 09:38
i see the ELD as a dumbed down version of the EAD.
the ELD is a PD ship and is good against destroyers and frigates.
EAD is a great PD ship and is good against dreads and stations.
if a group of UGTO ever had to face a team of missile/sniper frigates/destroyers, or even minelayers of any size, 1-3 ELDs would be a very good counter to said ICC (they could be kluth as well).
that said, a PD role for a T3 destroyer is not very effective. compare this with the EAD which is bested only by support stations as a PD net. but having a novel choice is good as well.
_________________
Forging legends and lives outside till naught remains inside.
|
Chewy Squirrel
Chief Marshal
Joined: January 27, 2003
Posts: 304
From: NYC
| Posted: 2014-04-16 19:06
Well it is better is almost every way from the tier 2 version of it. It has 4 more beams, and an extra armor plate at the cost of a single pd beam. So if it is out of line, the T2 dessy is even more out of line.
I don't think any of your suggestions can work within the current gadget point value system. Any one of those would put it grossly out of line with the point values of what a T3 dessy should have. Flux beams are a UGTO faction unique "medium" beam so 6 light beams for 5 medium beams is not an equivalent exchange (unless the position of flux beams changed as of 1.7). Same with doubling the heavy cannons or adding 2-3 armor plates. It would have to give something significant up for those upgrades.
Maybe if the design team wasn't so against dual roles it could be a cannon/cannon/escort with extra cannons and pd beams. Of course this would cost it that extra armor plate. I can also see how a destroyer level command/cannon/escort ship could be interesting and unique. The other option of cannon/missile/escort would have the same problem of really not enough cannons or missiles to be effective in either role.
Unless of course you are suggesting it be homogenized with the other 2 faction dessies and made a cannon/torpedo/beam, which would make it effective but boring.
[ This Message was edited by: Chewy Squirrel on 2014-04-16 19:12 ]
_________________
|
pigghoti
Vice Admiral
Joined: November 23, 2013
Posts: 10
| Posted: 2014-04-17 05:34
although probably in the wrong place, to possibly make the chem beams more effective would it help if there was subsystem targeting?
_________________
|
Jhomes
Chief Marshal
Joined: June 22, 2013
Posts: 92
| Posted: 2014-04-17 12:56
yea i know exchanging 6 standard beams for 5 flux beams isnt even exchange since 1 flux is worth 2 standard beams, but just seems lacking compared to other two tier 3 des. If you must stay within gadget point system then i suggest just replacing the 6 standard with 3 flux beams. It will still keep around the same damage but in use with flux wave as well will add in some system damage and thus maybe more incentive to be used.
_________________
|
Jhomes
Chief Marshal
Joined: June 22, 2013
Posts: 92
| Posted: 2014-04-17 13:07
oh yea why wouldnt tier 3 destroyer be able to double up roles and have 6 heavy cannons but there is an ugto destroyer that is a tier 2 cannon/bomber that has double cannon role of 6 heavy particle cannons along with its bombs. Now that i think about the gadget point system i cant help but think maybe this ship was supposed to have 6 standard light particle cannons and was accidently given 6 heavy ones, if not then how can it hav more firepower than the tier 1 gunboat destroyer?
_________________
|
Forger of Destiny
Chief Marshal
We Kick Arse
Joined: October 10, 2009
Posts: 826
| Posted: 2014-04-18 05:25
a comparative analysis of advantages
gunboat destroyer (cannon) - has 3 heavy and 3 regular cannons, 9 armor, 2 PD beams, 2 lasers
tactical bomber destroyer (cannon/bomber) - has 2 bombs, 6 heavy cannons, scanner, 7 armor, 2 PD beams, 2 lasers
elite line destroyer (cannon/beam/escort) - has 5 PD beams, 9 armor, scanner, 3 heavy cannons, 4 lasers
and thats it.
theyre balanced (not mentioned any weapon arc info) considering that higher tier ships have extra points to spend.
_________________
Forging legends and lives outside till naught remains inside.
|
Jhomes
Chief Marshal
Joined: June 22, 2013
Posts: 92
| Posted: 2014-04-18 16:37
My point was not that they arent balenced just responding to what chewy said about possible line des setup being cannon/cannon/PD. Currently its cannon/beam/pd, the 3 heavy particle cannons being the cannon part, so why does the tactical bomber des have 6 heavy cannons for its cannon part? Esp when can only fire 4 forward, 3 on each side and 2 aft. I never said it wasnt balanced with the gunboat destoyer, i said it came with more firepower. WHat i mean is more firepower on paper, even tho it doesnt use it for some reason. Seems a waste of points that could be spent elsewhere.
now back to the elite line destroyer im not trying to argue anything i just want a better ship for ugto that people actually want to use and to try and make aware that elite line destroyer is not used for a reason. My only real point in all of this is actually that 6 standard chemical beams isnt good enough for the beam portion of cannon/beam/PD escort setup and that is why it is not being used.
IMO if a ship is not being used then there is something wrong with the ship and should be brought to the attention of everyone and reworked, and as the case with so many of the poor unused ships on DS. 1 small tweak that could stay within point requirements would make all the difference in turning that ship around. Alot of unused ships downfalls are such small things as fire arcs and armor placement. So EVERYONE only by voicing these opinions will anyone know that these things are not working. I am sure the devs would rather listen to us blather on endlessly than see many of the ships that they worked so hard on not be used 
_________________
|
The_Enforcer (The Vindicator)
Fleet Admiral
Joined: March 05, 2010
Posts: 163
From: another dimension
| Posted: 2014-04-18 23:50
Elite Line Destroyer....... No
Elite Escort Destroyer...... Yes
Problem solved.
_________________
Problem Darkspace?
|
Forger of Destiny
Chief Marshal
We Kick Arse
Joined: October 10, 2009
Posts: 826
| Posted: 2014-04-19 01:44
the tactical bomber dessy gets its cannons for having only 7 armor instead of 8, thanks to the bomber role.
the gunboat gets not as much cannonpower but has 9 armor due to being tier 1.
the ELD gets a weak cannonpower due to having triple roles, in addition to having 9 armor instead of 8 (beam role).
and dual roles are assigned only to the agincourt supercarrier (carrier/carrier/escort) because it is special ^^, and might not be assigned to any other player ship.
a different set of roles for ELD? i'd like it as a cannon/missile/escort or missile/bomber/escort to be useful in planet sieges. the beam role only eats up precious points from other roles due to extra armor, and is not that useful in general.
[ This Message was edited by: Forger of Destiny on 2014-04-19 01:48 ]
_________________
Forging legends and lives outside till naught remains inside.
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
