View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0001026 | AI War 1 / Classic | Balance Issue | Nov 2, 2010 7:28 pm | Nov 5, 2010 10:05 am | |
| Reporter | Lancefighter | Assigned To | keith.lamothe | ||
| Status | resolved | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Product Version | 4.024 | ||||
| Fixed in Version | 4.029 | ||||
| Summary | 0001026: Lance's Bomber starships, Part III | ||||
| Description | This version of my general complaint on the balance of bomber starships, brought to you by the recent forcefield changes. Longsince have I felt bomber starships underwhelming dps-wise, but for the most part, they make up for it in raw alpha. Unfortunately, lately alpha means less and less - the recent change of forcefields means that even with a combined alpha of the entire lineup, you are getting 8,640,000 damage. dont get me wrong, this is an INCREDIBLE number. Until you realize, that actually applying this is impossible - shoot a forcefield? well.. the weakest one has 45m health. thats 6 volleys... Sure, ok, 6 volleys isnt horrible. Until you realize that the lineup of siege starships does 9,420,000 damage in the same volley. Thats only 5 volleys to down the shield, with some to spare. Ok, the disparody isnt too large, bomber starships get tons of speed and armor! siege starships must stay back, and are slow! true - but the sieges pay for this with their incredible range, outranging virtually anything the AI has. Oh, but it is. The bomber starships, take a whole MINUTE to down this mk1 forcefield. 6 volleys * 9 seconds.. ok, well, slightly less, but you get the point. The sieges finish the job in under 20 seconds. 1/3 of the time to do the same job... IGNORING travel distance (siege range is considerably greater, after all) I ask you - how can this be? How is it that siege starships become to completely out-dps bomber starships? Well, its simple really. Bomber starships have been ignored by virtue of not having a relative in the slimdx version. Nobody knows how they /should/ act.. Siege starships at one point were the only anti-capital in the player's arsenal, and for that, did upwards of 500k damage/hit. This was great, and still is great, but when they regained that for Unity.. bomber starships just got ignored. for some uninflated damage numbers: (remember, for 'normal', double all damage and half all rate of fire) dam/rof bombstar 280k/18 360k/18 440k/18 siege 192k/8 330k/8 450k/8 How shall it be fixed? Well, a difficult question. Some might say to retain the same role, they should just be given more alpha strike - While I certainly wouldnt disagree, im not sure that really differentiates it. Giving the mk1 an alpha in the (base) 450k(2:650k 3:850k) zone would certainly give them a considerable first strike capability, while still ceding the role of dps to the siege starships by a fairly wide margin (about 20%, if i did my math right) I beg.. No, I plea - give bomber starships back their umph. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | |||||
|
|
Actually, I'm inclined to believe the imbalance in Bomber Starships comes from them only recently becoming a stock player ship. I'd suggest increasing their damage further but shortening their range considerably. They should have to go right up to a target to hit it but then blow it to bits relatively quickly, I reckon. |
|
|
I.. said that, but apparently I switched their names. editing. |
|
|
I think the current range is ok enough. One could always make them a bit different with say giving them a force field each, making them harder in numbers to take out or introduce some modularity to them. Or, even make the Sieges even more specialiced in their own waym differentiating themself more away from Bombers. |
|
|
Fixed as per next update: Bomber starship rebalance: * Attack power 1/3x what it was. * Reload time 1/9x what it was. * Attack range from 5000 => 2500. * Health to 2x what it was. |
|
|
Well, in testing I'm having trouble with them not shooting at something, apparently due to range, even though it's right there, so I'm retesting with that back where it used to be. |
|
|
Ok, further testing shows the problem still happened at 5000, so I'm sticking with 2500. Will need to figure it out later. Lance (or anyone), do you ever notice your bomber-starships not firing at an explicitly-given target under a forcefield even though both it and the ff are clearly in range? |
|
|
no, i havent. I have, hwoever, noticed sometimes units not firing until under some ranges.. for instance, a while back x4000 gave all units a 2k range boost or something.. however, im not sure sometimes units are using that. sieges outrange mk3 (i think) arty guardian by about 2k units, but i couldnt get the sieges to fire until they were within the arty range. |
|
|
I've noticed BSes not shooting at armoreds, probably just the unit thinking "I cannot penetrate the shields at this range anyway". |
|
|
Ok, I just ran a simpler test, and confirmed that it was firing, it just doesn't draw the reload bar for something with a 2-second reload. I wonder if the AI was trying to tell me something when, after I sent the bomber starship through and saw it shooting at stuff, I zoomed out and saw 4 AI Siege Starships shelling it. Coincidence? I think not. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 2, 2010 7:28 pm | Lancefighter | New Issue | |
| Nov 3, 2010 5:07 am | zebramatt | Note Added: 0002598 | |
| Nov 3, 2010 5:13 am | Lancefighter | Note Added: 0002599 | |
| Nov 3, 2010 5:14 am | Lancefighter | Description Updated | |
| Nov 4, 2010 4:55 am | Ozymandiaz | Note Added: 0002674 | |
| Nov 4, 2010 11:40 pm | Lancefighter | Note Added: 0002741 | |
| Nov 4, 2010 11:41 pm | Lancefighter | Resolution | open => fixed |
| Nov 4, 2010 11:41 pm | Lancefighter | Fixed in Version | => 4.029 |
| Nov 4, 2010 11:48 pm | keith.lamothe | Note Added: 0002742 | |
| Nov 4, 2010 11:53 pm | keith.lamothe | Note Added: 0002744 | |
| Nov 5, 2010 12:41 am | Lancefighter | Note Added: 0002746 | |
| Nov 5, 2010 9:38 am | KDR_11k | Note Added: 0002760 | |
| Nov 5, 2010 10:02 am | keith.lamothe | Note Added: 0002761 | |
| Nov 5, 2010 10:05 am | keith.lamothe | Status | new => resolved |
| Nov 5, 2010 10:05 am | keith.lamothe | Assigned To | => keith.lamothe |
| Apr 14, 2014 9:29 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Category | Gameplay - Balance Issue => Balance Issue |
