| Author |
[Beta] Dreadnaught layouts |
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
|  Posted: 2011-05-20 14:03
Not really, Cruisers can easily stay at 600 GU and be virtually immune to return fire (falloff from Particle isn't bad at 600, and Psi/Plasma have no falloff from what I can tell) if you're at all a competent pilot. I've done this myself in a HC against 1 BD and 3 EAD plus a Command Dread that I almost killed right out from under the other 4 while it was trying to bomb a planet, 2 of the others ran off as well after taking hull damage, only thing that stopped me was ammo. I will admit to having a little help from the planetary defenses but we all know how next to useless those are.
Did it again later the same day at another planet, 1 HC vs 3 EAD+2 BD and a shroom around a planet with no Interdictor after someone of questionable intelligence replaced it with a sensor base, admittedly it probably wouldn't have gone so well if any of them were good at point jumping (none of them ever got closer than 300 GU) but 3 of them left because they got hulled, then the planet capped and I had no more reason to stick around so I left as well.
If anything the new layouts will make it easier for Cruisers to hold their own against Dreadnoughts, only difference is it'll be much less forgiving if you get caught by a lucky point jump.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
MrSparkle
Marshal
Joined: August 13, 2001
Posts: 1912
From: mrsparkle
| Posted: 2011-05-20 14:14
Try it without planet defenses making the dreads flee.
Cruisers are OK but they're usually not what you want to bring to a dread fight. I expect that to change with the patch but not by much; we will still mostly see cruisers flown by players who can't yet get a good dread.
_________________
|
Marius Falix
Grand Admiral
Joined: July 05, 2010
Posts: 268
From: Luyten
| Posted: 2011-05-20 19:57
Im sorry, did i miss the ICC section?
very litle mention of their ships within the first ten pages and as a ICC player thats what i was mainly looking for however the info gleaned is going to be usefull.
Major point is the CD. ICC themselves arent a major threat however with just 3 updated CD's many Ugto forces will be easily routed. because lets face it, its a BD but with better range and less fall out and again with Ugto usually flying Shrooms and Dreads (i have seen a few cruisers but witht eh update im sure theyl be testing out the newer ships) they will be in for a world of trouble. Luth have the easy counter of being able to get close enough to remove the Range bonus and of course the surprise aspect but with the amount of cannons on their broadsides they should be able to put up a good fight
_________________
“We give our lives for the lives of Humanity. May you all see better days.”
We are the Falix Brothers...
|
*FTL*Soulless
Marshal
Joined: June 25, 2010
Posts: 787
From: Dres-Kona
| Posted: 2011-05-21 22:49
Dread shield are gonna need a buff if they are going to be able to take on anything above dessie for very long. I say that cause an Ai luth tranny saped 20% of my fore shields during the time it fired
_________________
We are Back from the shadows.
|
Forger of Destiny
Chief Marshal
We Kick Arse
Joined: October 10, 2009
Posts: 826
| Posted: 2011-05-21 23:25
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-21 22:49, Cmdr Zod wrote:
Dread shield are gonna need a buff if they are going to be able to take on anything above dessie for very long. I say that cause an Ai luth tranny saped 20% of my fore shields during the time it fired
|
|
You need to realise this - combat is not supposed to be long slugfest matches. Combat is being transformed into short-term fights and 2-minute frenzies. You are not meant to be able to tank damage and return fire over long periods of time.
If a transport can damage you this much, you should have guessed it that-
If it has weapons, it is a threat. You cannot take a scout armed with cannons or engineer with beams lightly anymore.
The converse is also true - if a transport can sap 20% of your fore shields (which is not much damage IMO), then you can kill it in one alpha aswell. Your shields seem to be weak because you gave the enemy a chance to fire. Tactics for win.
_________________
Forging legends and lives outside till naught remains inside.
|
*FTL*Soulless
Marshal
Joined: June 25, 2010
Posts: 787
From: Dres-Kona
| Posted: 2011-05-21 23:30
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-21 23:25, Brahmastra wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-21 22:49, Cmdr Zod wrote:
Dread shield are gonna need a buff if they are going to be able to take on anything above dessie for very long. I say that cause an Ai luth tranny saped 20% of my fore shields during the time it fired
|
|
You need to realise this - combat is not supposed to be long slugfest matches. Combat is being transformed into short-term fights and 2-minute frenzies. You are not meant to be able to tank damage and return fire over long periods of time.
If a transport can damage you this much, you should have guessed it that-
If it has weapons, it is a threat. You cannot take a scout armed with cannons or engineer with beams lightly anymore.
The converse is also true - if a transport can sap 20% of your fore shields (which is not much damage IMO), then you can kill it in one alpha aswell. Your shields seem to be weak because you gave the enemy a chance to fire. Tactics for win.
|
|
it took 2 alphas to kill it. And i seriously doubt that a tranny was ment to do 20% damage to a shield arc in 1 alpha
_________________
We are Back from the shadows.
|
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
| Posted: 2011-05-22 00:31
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-21 23:30, Cmdr Zod wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-21 23:25, Brahmastra wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-21 22:49, Cmdr Zod wrote:
Dread shield are gonna need a buff if they are going to be able to take on anything above dessie for very long. I say that cause an Ai luth tranny saped 20% of my fore shields during the time it fired
|
|
You need to realise this - combat is not supposed to be long slugfest matches. Combat is being transformed into short-term fights and 2-minute frenzies. You are not meant to be able to tank damage and return fire over long periods of time.
If a transport can damage you this much, you should have guessed it that-
If it has weapons, it is a threat. You cannot take a scout armed with cannons or engineer with beams lightly anymore.
The converse is also true - if a transport can sap 20% of your fore shields (which is not much damage IMO), then you can kill it in one alpha aswell. Your shields seem to be weak because you gave the enemy a chance to fire. Tactics for win.
|
|
it took 2 alphas to kill it. And i seriously doubt that a tranny was ment to do 20% damage to a shield arc in 1 alpha
|
|
Aaaanndd Jack said that shield hp is almost equal to armor hp. QQ moar?
_________________
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2011-05-22 02:06
the apropriate thing to do, is to test alpha damage (on a small scale as to not abliverate the gadget in question) vs armor and sheild. See wich one is more resilliant.
Sheilds vs Normal armor || ablative armor || reflective armor || organic armor.
while this has nothing to do with beta dread layouts, it would help aliviate, or confirm suspisions that sheilds are in fact far worse off than armor.
if so, sheilds are weaker than armor because we can redirect sheilds to one arc... but thats hardly an excuse in 1.67 where a single alpha can burn off 100% of your shields on every arc. The only thing stopping this from happening is the cap placed on our rotation rate.
how does this tie in with dread layouts?
ICC "IS" ment to have the best defence. ICC "IS" ment to stand off and tank lots of damage. ICC "DOES" have weaker offence to balance this.
currently in 1.67 all icc has over the other two races, is a range supirority of ~150GU. pathetic by anyones standards.
take away our ability to tank through overwhelming force affectivly lowers our damage over time.
by reducing our defence through increased offence, you affectivly lower our offencive ability too.
**Point and case;
a test done with EAD vs AD nose to nose ended in the AD dying. The EAD had enough offence to eat 4 arcs of sheild, two arks of armor, and hull befor the AD could cut through 3 arcs of armor and hull.
if you tried that same test in 1.66, the ead would loose horribly.
offence vs defence ballance when conserned with icc dreads, is horribly slanted to the other factions... anyone who cannot see this is blind. Do you not want a challange from icc?
[ This Message was edited by: Defiance*XO* on 2011-05-22 02:26 ]
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
SpaceAdmiral
Grand Admiral
Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 1005
| Posted: 2011-05-22 02:43
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-22 02:06, Defiance*XO* wrote:
the apropriate thing to do, is to test alpha damage (on a small scale as to not abliverate the gadget in question) vs armor and sheild. See wich one is more resilliant.
Sheilds vs Normal armor || ablative armor || reflective armor || organic armor.
while this has nothing to do with beta dread layouts, it would help aliviate, or confirm suspisions that sheilds are in fact far worse off than armor.
if so, sheilds are weaker than armor because we can redirect sheilds to one arc... but thats hardly an excuse in 1.67 where a single alpha can burn off 100% of your shields on every arc. The only thing stopping this from happening is the cap placed on our rotation rate.
how does this tie in with dread layouts?
ICC "IS" ment to have the best defence. ICC "IS" ment to stand off and tank lots of damage. ICC "DOES" have weaker offence to balance this.
currently in 1.67 all icc has over the other two races, is a range supirority of ~150GU. pathetic by anyones standards.
take away our ability to tank through overwhelming force affectivly lowers our damage over time.
by reducing our defence through increased offence, you affectivly lower our offencive ability too.
**Point and case;
a test done with EAD vs AD nose to nose ended in the AD dying. The EAD had enough offence to eat 4 arcs of sheild, two arks of armor, and hull befor the AD could cut through 3 arcs of armor and hull.
if you tried that same test in 1.66, the ead would loose horribly.
offence vs defence ballance when conserned with icc dreads, is horribly slanted to the other factions... anyone who cannot see this is blind. Do you not want a challange from icc?
[ This Message was edited by: Defiance*XO* on 2011-05-22 02:26 ]
|
|
Jack said shields were more than 90% of armor, but had more regen. This means significantly more hp over long periods of time.
ICC Weps:
Torps are significantly faster for their lower damage.
Rails hit harder and are faster than pcannons at over 400 gu.
ICC cores fire twice and I believe they are the fastest projectiles in game.
ICC is meant to standoff, or in the case of the new layouts, use rear cannons to run and fire.
Technical range advantage: 150 gu
Actual range advantage with superior dodging, weapon speeds, and no fall off: A lot more, I would say 300-500 gu depending on weapon.
You went the slugger way (Get in close, tank some damage, and smash the enemy with brute force) against the slugger faction's sluggiest ship. This proves what?
In release the AD would win even though it is the long range faction. A bit contradictory?
_________________
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2011-05-22 03:07
your dodging the issue....
ICC dread vs UGTO dread
UGTO dread has supirior defence due to specialized armor and vastly supirior offence.
UGTO dread has supirior offence.
ICC dread has better manuverability, but with fire rates of core weapons so high, thats moot.
ICC has supirior range by ~150gu... roughly 15 seconds of combat to close that gap.
++ i dont want icc dreads in 1.67 to become like icc stations in 1.66. We dont fly them because kluth, ugto counterparts are vastly supirior in both defence and offence....
Lets just say, im not going to sit idle and wach it happen. If i did, then people would ask us why we did not speak up while it was in beta.. If we speak up while its in beta, there is alwasy that one guy trying to derail everything we put forth with "you guys qq too much".
and ive not even started on ICC vs kluth... what a trainwreck that is........
Ive flown ICC since 2007 on multiple accounts. Im more than qualified to make these observations.
on this account alone, i have over 67 days of ICC play. Those making arguments against ICC havent even a third of that, as their faction no less.
Is this an issue? Yes
Do i know the fix to this issue? no
Im just stating why ICC is about to become a cruiser only faction, and how unappealing that will be to fight against.
[ This Message was edited by: Defiance*XO* on 2011-05-22 03:23 ]
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2011-05-22 04:07
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-22 02:43, SpaceAdmiral wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2011-05-22 02:06, Defiance*XO* wrote:
the apropriate thing to do, is to test alpha damage (on a small scale as to not abliverate the gadget in question) vs armor and sheild. See wich one is more resilliant.
Sheilds vs Normal armor || ablative armor || reflective armor || organic armor.
while this has nothing to do with beta dread layouts, it would help aliviate, or confirm suspisions that sheilds are in fact far worse off than armor.
if so, sheilds are weaker than armor because we can redirect sheilds to one arc... but thats hardly an excuse in 1.67 where a single alpha can burn off 100% of your shields on every arc. The only thing stopping this from happening is the cap placed on our rotation rate.
how does this tie in with dread layouts?
ICC "IS" ment to have the best defence. ICC "IS" ment to stand off and tank lots of damage. ICC "DOES" have weaker offence to balance this.
currently in 1.67 all icc has over the other two races, is a range supirority of ~150GU. pathetic by anyones standards.
take away our ability to tank through overwhelming force affectivly lowers our damage over time.
by reducing our defence through increased offence, you affectivly lower our offencive ability too.
**Point and case;
a test done with EAD vs AD nose to nose ended in the AD dying. The EAD had enough offence to eat 4 arcs of sheild, two arks of armor, and hull befor the AD could cut through 3 arcs of armor and hull.
if you tried that same test in 1.66, the ead would loose horribly.
offence vs defence ballance when conserned with icc dreads, is horribly slanted to the other factions... anyone who cannot see this is blind. Do you not want a challange from icc?
[ This Message was edited by: Defiance*XO* on 2011-05-22 02:26 ]
|
|
Jack said shields were more than 90% of armor, but had more regen. This means significantly more hp over long periods of time.
ICC Weps:
Torps are significantly faster for their lower damage.
Rails hit harder and are faster than pcannons at over 400 gu.
ICC cores fire twice and I believe they are the fastest projectiles in game.
ICC is meant to standoff, or in the case of the new layouts, use rear cannons to run and fire.
Technical range advantage: 150 gu
Actual range advantage with superior dodging, weapon speeds, and no fall off: A lot more, I would say 300-500 gu depending on weapon.
You went the slugger way (Get in close, tank some damage, and smash the enemy with brute force) against the slugger faction's sluggiest ship. This proves what?
In release the AD would win even though it is the long range faction. A bit contradictory?
|
|
I think you miss the point too.
A lot of people will say that 1 vs 1 isn't indicative of true performance. However, I say it does tell us something.
Because if you field 5 EADs vs 5 ADs, it will still end up as a slaughter for the ADs. Ideally, the ADs should be able to tank more damage than the EAD if they stood still and pummelled each other.
So IMO, something's broken with the "defensive" faction.
And something is wrong when the "balanced" faction has the most armor and firepower in a slugging match.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Forger of Destiny
Chief Marshal
We Kick Arse
Joined: October 10, 2009
Posts: 826
| Posted: 2011-05-22 04:59
A second look at the AD makes me feel that it could do better with +1 to HCLs. I suggest removing the ECCM (despite its usefulness vs K'Luth) and making one of the tri-arc core weapons into fore-arc only, to accomodate an addition of HCL.
Also, about shield vs armor, shield is endurance type defense (can resist low-medium damage for long time) and armor is strength type defense (can resist high damage for short time), except that shields also have damage resistances.
I suggest upping the energy consumption rate by 10-20%, and change the resistance of shields from [15% energy/15% psi] to [15% energy/10% kinetic/10% psi], so that they also resist UGTO weapons. Also, they would defend better against K'Luth at long range by sacrificing some close range defense. This will also promote use of interdictor, sensor frigate and recon scout more - it will become viable for ICC to attack at range than jump in with ADs.
_________________
Forging legends and lives outside till naught remains inside.
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2011-05-22 05:37
to remove the ECCM from the AD, and weaken shields all around (your suggestions would hurt more than help) would be the final nail in ICC coffin.
AD is our only counter to Kluth, to weaken it against them is unthinkable.
One MAJOR, and simple step in the right direction, would be to put the ADs other for active shield generator back. Let us test it that way.. may fix everything who knows.
[ This Message was edited by: Defiance*XO* on 2011-05-22 05:40 ]
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Tommas [ USF HunnyBunny ]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: February 04, 2006
Posts: 581
From: Norway
| Posted: 2011-05-22 07:37
Icc shield is better over time you say? But what does that matter when the new combat will be a short duration? Couple of alphas and your ship is gone.
.
_________________
|
MarineKingPrime
Marshal
Exathra Alliance Fleet
Joined: October 04, 2010
Posts: 239
From: CSS CheezyBagels
| Posted: 2011-05-22 09:23
as long as icc looks good on paper, it doesn't matter how good icc actually is.
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
