Welcome aboard Visitor...

Daily Screenshot

Server Costs Target


94% of target met.

Latest Topics

- Anyone still playing from a decade ago or longer? »
- Game still active. NICE! »
- Password resett »
- Darkspace Idea/Opinion Submission Thread »
- Rank Bug maybe? »
- Next patch .... »
- Nobody will remember me...but. »
- 22 years...asking for help from one community to another »
- DS on Ubuntu? »
- Medal Breakpoints »

Development Blog

- Roadmap »
- Hello strangers, it’s been a while... »
- State of DarkSpace Development »
- Potential planetary interdictor changes! »
- The Silent Cartographer »

Combat Kills

Combat kills in last 24 hours:
No kills today... yet.

Upcoming Events

- Towel Day
05/25/24 +5.4 Days
- Weekly DarkSpace
05/25/24 +6.1 Days

Search

Anniversaries

22th - Enterprise
21th - Hobbyte

Social Media

Why not join us on Discord for a chat, or follow us on Twitter or Facebook for more information and fan updates?

Network

DarkSpace
DarkSpace - Beta
Palestar

[FAQ
Forum Index » » English (General) » » General Discussion: 1.670 (Beta)
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Next Page )
 Author General Discussion: 1.670 (Beta)
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light


Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
Posted: 2011-05-06 15:37   
everybody did. we all use beams
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144

MarineKingPrime
Marshal
Exathra Alliance Fleet


Joined: October 04, 2010
Posts: 239
From: CSS CheezyBagels
Posted: 2011-05-06 16:31   
just played with the new dreads, i see why the beam update was necessary now.
_________________


BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy


Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
Posted: 2011-05-06 16:42   
Another update to slightly nerf the damage Flux Beam does when it's not hitting hull, and to reduce Disruptor 'punchy-ness'.
_________________


SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral

Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
Posted: 2011-05-06 18:21   
Quote:

On 2011-05-06 15:35, darksmaster923 (3IC) wrote:
so kluth just got buffed with the beam update?



HELLOOOO MANDIBLE!!!!!! WOOT!!!! NOW YOU HAVE A CHOICE BETWEEN SIPHON AND MANDIBLE!!!!!
_________________


The Fridge
Chief Marshal
Templar Knights


Joined: December 13, 2008
Posts: 559
From: In Your Fridge, Eating your Foods.
Posted: 2011-05-06 20:09   
Quote:

On 2011-05-06 18:21, SpaceAdmiral wrote:
Quote:

On 2011-05-06 15:35, darksmaster923 (3IC) wrote:
so kluth just got buffed with the beam update?



HELLOOOO MANDIBLE!!!!!! WOOT!!!! NOW YOU HAVE A CHOICE BETWEEN SIPHON AND MANDIBLE!!!!!




Mandi is a sick ship in release.
_________________



Borgie
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black


Joined: August 15, 2005
Posts: 2256
From: close by
Posted: 2011-05-06 21:33   
Quote:

On 2011-05-06 20:09, The Fridge wrote:
Quote:

On 2011-05-06 18:21, SpaceAdmiral wrote:
Quote:

On 2011-05-06 15:35, darksmaster923 (3IC) wrote:
so kluth just got buffed with the beam update?



HELLOOOO MANDIBLE!!!!!! WOOT!!!! NOW YOU HAVE A CHOICE BETWEEN SIPHON AND MANDIBLE!!!!!




Mandi is a sick ship in release.




no kidding, i actully think the mandi's beam load out might be a bit too strong. the disruptor assualts killed an ai tranny before my beams even finshed there full firing
_________________


  Email Borgie
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black


Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
Posted: 2011-05-06 21:48   
Quote:

On 2011-05-06 15:35, darksmaster923 (3IC) wrote:
so kluth just got buffed with the beam update?




Everyone got buffed. It's just that we have more beams.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....


Reznor
Marshal

Joined: March 29, 2010
Posts: 316
Posted: 2011-05-07 00:40   
For those worried that this will make assault dreads overpowered, know that the number of beams on dreads is being reduced.

More powerful, but LESS of them.

Source? Jim told me so, and he's the one messing with this stuff .
_________________
Indictor: 1. To accuse of wrongdoing

Interdictor: (DS) A planetary emplacement or Cruiser Class vessel capable of preventing FTL travel in a certain radius.

SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral

Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
Posted: 2011-05-07 02:50   
Mandi seems pretty good in release, but I found a beam heavy layout didn't give much punch for its energy.

EDIT: My new dreadnought thoughts.

UGTO:
Overall: Many buffs, especially in cannon arcs, it seems every non-Assault UGTO dread got a minimum of 10 (5 heavies) cannons pointed at all arcs.

Battle Dread: Recieves cannon buffs, fore and side increased from 11 to 14 I believe with its rear recieveing a massive buff. The new BD has 14 cannons in all directions (7 heavy to be exact), maxing the only difference between arcs beams and in the case of facing rear, the 2 QSTs.

Command Dread: Call me crazy, but I actually think that this command dread might be viable for the front lines. Its 10 frontal torps and cannons (5 heavys) is nothing to be laughed at, 3 EMP mines a bit random but we will see more mine usage (EMP mines might be lacking vs other factions' mines I think). It has 2 build drones to quickly build platforms and nice EW. Overall still a jack of all trades, can lead assaults with torps and cannons, can build platforms in sieges, and can mine offensively or defensively.
EDIT: Command Dread mines are quite powerful, by not moving at all and laying 1 batch of mine at a time, then self detonating them, the 2nd batch hulled me and the 3rd got me to 75 hull. 2 batches are allowed on the field at any given time.

Carrier Dread: Lost some EW power(2 slots), lost 2 fighters, lost the missiles in exchange for more side beams (proly PD), and the doubling of the fore cannons from 5 to 10. The side cannons got increased from 8 to 10 I believe. To me it fights a little behind the Battle Dreads, lacking a bit of the BD's firepower but being able to provide PD and fighters. (It has less fore and aft pd, but way superior side pd)
Also the carrier's beam hardpoints are all over the place lol. (arcs are the same but where the beams are located and where they point are not symmetrical)

EAD: Less light beams = less pd, but was necessary for beam buffs. Gained quite a few torps, totaling 15 fore and 6 to the sides. Overall got more torpier and with new beam buffs it still retains 5 hcls. More standoffish with torp buffs too.

I will post more, but for now my comps getting really hot, so I'ma do it after I sleep.

On a side note: My computer seems to be overheating if I play darkspace beta at highest graphics. (slide bar to near max for everything) Any idea to stop this? (It's a laptop, Specs: (I'm just reciting whats on the stickers, I have no idea what some of these mean)
Dual core i5-430M @ 2.26 GHz, 3MB L3 cache
ATI Mobility Raedon HD 5470 Up to 2235 MB Hyper Memory
Acer Nplify 802.11 b/g/n
4 GB RAM
[ This Message was edited by: SpaceAdmiral on 2011-05-07 03:41 ]
_________________


Enterprise
Chief Marshal

Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
Posted: 2011-05-07 06:04   
Quote:

On 2011-05-07 02:50, SpaceAdmiral wrote:

Command Dread: Call me crazy, but I actually think that this command dread might be viable for the front lines. Its 10 frontal torps and cannons (5 heavys) is nothing to be laughed at, 3 EMP mines a bit random but we will see more mine usage (EMP mines might be lacking vs other factions' mines I think). It has 2 build drones to quickly build platforms and nice EW. Overall still a jack of all trades, can lead assaults with torps and cannons, can build platforms in sieges, and can mine offensively or defensively.
EDIT: Command Dread mines are quite powerful, by not moving at all and laying 1 batch of mine at a time, then self detonating them, the 2nd batch hulled me and the 3rd got me to 75 hull. 2 batches are allowed on the field at any given time.



I honestly had to check Beta to see this for myself, and I had to laugh. Maniacly.

Okay, I get it, UGTO is more offensive than ICC.

However, if someone can please, please, please give me some kind of logical reason the UGTO Command Dread is completely able to beat the hell out of things but the ICC Command Dreadnaught can.. not.

Let me illustrate.

The UGTO Command Dread has that.

Now replace the torps, the mines, all the cannons with three tractor beams and six fighters.

And now you have the ICC Command Carrier.

If someone could be happy enough to explain this massive.. overwhelming discrepancy, that would be nice.




-Ent
_________________


Fatal Perihelion
Chief Marshal
Fatal Squadron


Joined: April 15, 2010
Posts: 308
Posted: 2011-05-07 06:29   
Quote:

On 2011-05-07 06:04, Enterprise wrote:
I honestly had to check Beta to see this for myself, and I had to laugh. Maniacly.

Okay, I get it, UGTO is more offensive than ICC.

However, if someone can please, please, please give me some kind of logical reason the UGTO Command Dread is completely able to beat the hell out of things but the ICC Command Dreadnaught can.. not.

Let me illustrate.

The UGTO Command Dread has that.

Now replace the torps, the mines, all the cannons with three tractor beams and six fighters.

And now you have the ICC Command Carrier.

If someone could be happy enough to explain this massive.. overwhelming discrepancy, that would be nice.




-Ent





Maybe i am not up to date and lack UGTO knowledge, but with the ICC Command Carrier, you may get a negative signature and launch fighters secretly, can the UGTO Command Dread do this too?
Just saying they are 2 very different ships.
_________________


Enterprise
Chief Marshal

Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
Posted: 2011-05-07 06:43   
Quote:

On 2011-05-07 06:29, Fatal Perihelion wrote:
Quote:

On 2011-05-07 06:04, Enterprise wrote:
I honestly had to check Beta to see this for myself, and I had to laugh. Maniacly.

Okay, I get it, UGTO is more offensive than ICC.

However, if someone can please, please, please give me some kind of logical reason the UGTO Command Dread is completely able to beat the hell out of things but the ICC Command Dreadnaught can.. not.

Let me illustrate.

The UGTO Command Dread has that.

Now replace the torps, the mines, all the cannons with three tractor beams and six fighters.

And now you have the ICC Command Carrier.

If someone could be happy enough to explain this massive.. overwhelming discrepancy, that would be nice.




-Ent





Maybe i am not up to date and lack UGTO knowledge, but with the ICC Command Carrier, you may get a negative signature and launch fighters secretly, can the UGTO Command Dread do this too?
Just saying they are 2 very different ships.




UGTO has same number of EW slots.


And who would choose six fighters over overwhelming firepower? Really.




-Ent
_________________


Bardiche
Chief Marshal

Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1247
Posted: 2011-05-07 06:58   
Looking in beta, it does look like the Command Carrier trades everything UGTO's Command Dread has for six fighters. It... fighters are quite competent, but I would never select the ICC Command over UGTO Command - one of these ships can fend off attackers, the other can only attack them from great range and out of harm's way itself.
_________________


SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral

Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
Posted: 2011-05-07 19:47   
Haven't seen ICC dreads yet, again my overheating problem, but it seems from your description that the CC is a really, really big engineer. The only advantage it has is that it can sustain itself when building, the command dread must rely on an outside mining source. That and it can spam some fighters.
_________________


CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light


Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
Posted: 2011-05-07 21:42   
I rather like our Command ship.
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Next Page )
Page created in 0.014694 seconds.


Copyright © 2000 - 2024 Palestar Inc. All rights reserved worldwide.
Terms of use - DarkSpace is a Registered Trademark of PALESTAR