View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0001726 | AI War 1 / Classic | Suggestion - Balance Tweaks | Dec 2, 2010 11:59 pm | Mar 12, 2011 2:46 am | |
| Reporter | Spikey00 | Assigned To | Chris_McElligottPark | ||
| Status | resolved | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Product Version | 4.043 | ||||
| Fixed in Version | 4.069 | ||||
| Summary | 0001726: Spire ram tweaks | ||||
| Description | They were buffed recently, but I'm still concerned mainly about their: a) lack of health in comparison to martyrs, - First "MK" has 2 million HP in comparison to 10 million of martyrs, so an HP boost is still needed here to ensure that they can make it to their objective, and perhaps even across planets. b) lack of ignore forcefield attribute, - Crucial for their effectiveness for where you absolutely need to take out something under an FF. These need to be able to penetrate objects under forcefields. c) can be disrupted in various ways, - I've seen units such as gravity rippers work against martyrs, effectively stopping them from reaching a certain goal, and thus the same for rams. Rams need to be immune from most or all sorts of disruptive affects, and perhaps be immune to speed hindrances and blackhole machines. d) still are out-shadowed by the brilliance of the martyr. - For how many instances do you really need a single-use unit that only does damage to a single object? I see that in nearly most cases I would prefer the use of a marytr instead because it's just generally more useful. Maybe an overall re-balancing is needed here, maybe the martyr needs to serve an entirely different purpose (tractor-exclusive?) | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | |||||
|
|
Just FYI. If Rams ignore FFs, then one of them WILL come up and nuke your home command station like so much tissue paper. |
|
|
I used Rams with Cloaker starships before the Fortress health rebalance, and they worked quite well. Three mark 1 Rams took it down with overkill. Two and bombers would have been nice. Whether hey need a buff is one thing, but they do fill a niche quite nicely, albeit with some required support. With the current range nerf to fortresses, I need to try again without cloakers and see how I do. I am neither for nor against rebalancing, but I will say they are quite useful when dealing with fortresses under the effect of inter-planetary munitions boosters. |
|
|
Maybe give them a severe penalty against command-center hull (.01 or maybe even 0), and then give them the force-field immunity. That should stop easy gimping of command stations. |
|
|
The higher mark rams are very useful to take down the core force fields in a matter of seconds, so I would not want them to be immune to force fields. |
|
|
Even if they are immune to force-fields, you can still target the force-fields directly. |
|
|
On one more note, they had quite an easy time taking down an armored golem without cloak support, just general insystem noise. |
|
|
Thanks! * Spire Mini Rams now have a 2x bonus against structural ship types, and are now immune to force fields (they can still hit forcefields, of course). They also now have a 0.001 penalty against command grade hulls. ** Spirecraft Rams also now have the same new bonuses. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 2, 2010 11:59 pm | Spikey00 | New Issue | |
| Dec 3, 2010 1:23 am | Draco18s | Note Added: 0005016 | |
| Jan 11, 2011 7:00 pm | LordSloth | Note Added: 0008290 | |
| Jan 11, 2011 7:16 pm | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0008293 | |
| Jan 11, 2011 9:45 pm | Burnstreet | Note Added: 0008318 | |
| Jan 11, 2011 9:49 pm | TechSY730 | Note Added: 0008319 | |
| Jan 16, 2011 3:06 pm | LordSloth | Note Added: 0008742 | |
| Jan 17, 2011 1:25 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0008842 | |
| Jan 17, 2011 1:25 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | new => resolved |
| Jan 17, 2011 1:25 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Fixed in Version | => 4.069 |
| Jan 17, 2011 1:25 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Resolution | open => fixed |
| Jan 17, 2011 1:25 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Assigned To | => Chris_McElligottPark |
