View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0022297 | AI War 2 | Balance Issue | Dec 1, 2019 10:57 am | Dec 12, 2019 11:35 am | |
| Reporter | Peter Ebbesen | Assigned To | RocketAssistedPuffin | ||
| Severity | minor | ||||
| Status | resolved | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Product Version | 1.010 Extracting Those Archives | ||||
| Fixed in Version | 1.014 High AIP Playstyle Viability | ||||
| Summary | 0022297: Heavy Beam Cannon utterly underwhelming; Give Spire Frigate treatment? | ||||
| Description | I just played a game in which the RNG blessed me with an abundance of HBC controllers as well as a few Plasma controllers and one each of the remaining types. And 3 out of the 4 turret controllers closest to my starting planet were HBCs. So I decided to invest in Splash 4 and Subtlety 4 to test just how well cannon stacked up, as that was what the game gave me to work with. Previously I've only had 0-2 HBCs on a planet and never high mark, so I haven't been able to properly assess their effectiveness. In this game, on planets exposed to wave attacks, I built a defense of HBCs, Snipers, and Spiders and set HBCs so they covered the the wormhole entrance and on the line towards the station in the system - this should be an ideal "sitting duck" situation for massed HBCs. This time, I had a lot more. They proved to be paper tigers. Despite providing impressive defense strength estimates, such a defense was vastly less powerful than any equivalent energy cost mk. 5 defense I've made using other turrets. And that's not because a mix of other high-mark turrets provide higher damage through good damage multipliers, but because of the incredibly poor HBC targeting. Only when the HBCs themselves were almost completely overrun by enemy craft were they doing a good job. In lieu of better targeting (which is what is truly needed, both for Spire Frigates and HBCs, though that would require a rebalancing of stats afterwards) I'd suggest giving them the Spire treatment to reduce the overkill of single target issue and on average hit more targets and stacks as individual targets are wiped out. Since the Spire beams are now 1s cycle rate and they have superior technology, how about making these human HBCs have a 2s cycle rather than 6s and deal a third the damage with each beam. It is either that or hoping that the RNG doesn't give you HBCs as your primary turret option, because as useful as having one or two HBCs on chokepoint planet is, even at mark 1, having more or paying science for splash for higher mark turrets really isn't worth it if you have access to any other turret you can use instead. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
|
|
Puffin, thoughts? |
|
|
On that note, could we have some damage estimate for AOEs in the full tolltips? Currently we only have the last damage dealth on an individual target. That makes it hard to check how well Beam frigates perform, especially when dealing with stacked fleets. It would also be nice to be sure that Siege frigates actually do their full damage when the last damage inflicted ends up being 358 damage (presumably due to too many enemies in the area). HBC have also proven pretty poor on my end. They're much more usable than before, with halved energy cost compared to before, but they are very unreliable when the AI throw raiders in the wave that spread all over the place. It might be a lot worse depending on your computer setup though, given how the stacking mechanic work. |
|
|
Trying to use heavy beam cannons against fast units like raiders feels like you are expecting them to work well even against their counters. I'd be satisfied if they just always hit one target, instead of missing targets moving laterally. Even the Spire frigates have that problem though, but you can move them to intercept and prevent this problem. You can't move a HBC. The proper way to counter fast units like Raiders is the sniper turret. They are much more effective, and the HBC are effective against slower clustered ships. That's the way I see it though. |
|
|
StarKelp far as I know added in a fix that makes them hit such moving targets. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 1, 2019 10:57 am | Peter Ebbesen | New Issue | |
| Dec 1, 2019 11:13 am | Peter Ebbesen | Description Updated | |
| Dec 1, 2019 11:54 pm | BadgerBadger | Assigned To | => RocketAssistedPuffin |
| Dec 1, 2019 11:54 pm | BadgerBadger | Status | new => assigned |
| Dec 1, 2019 11:54 pm | BadgerBadger | Note Added: 0054772 | |
| Dec 2, 2019 4:57 am | ArnaudB | Note Added: 0054775 | |
| Dec 3, 2019 11:49 am | Peter Ebbesen | Description Updated | |
| Dec 11, 2019 7:56 pm | RocketAssistedPuffin | Status | assigned => resolved |
| Dec 11, 2019 7:56 pm | RocketAssistedPuffin | Resolution | open => fixed |
| Dec 11, 2019 7:56 pm | RocketAssistedPuffin | Fixed in Version | => 1.014 High AIP Playstyle Viability |
| Dec 12, 2019 11:32 am | Chthonic One | Note Added: 0054967 | |
| Dec 12, 2019 11:35 am | RocketAssistedPuffin | Note Added: 0054968 |
