New ship list discussion

Post here if you are interested in the balancing of the Tim branded shiplist

Moderators: BitMask, Havok

User avatar
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Posts: 688

New ship list discussion

Post#1 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:31 am

I would like to get input from players on what changes they think would be beneficial to the ship list.

I intend to run combat simulations on any potential changes, but I need input from experienced players for each race. The hard part is that I want to know which ships you think are overpowered in your favorite race's ship list.

][avok, if you could, I would like you to move the part of the FHost discussion between BANE and me about ship changes to this thread.

Thank you,

Zaphod Beeblebrox

User avatar
B A N E
Posts: 3777

Post#2 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:33 am

good idea Zap.

Btw, I'll be back this evening.
I'm off on a strawberry picking jaunt for the morning.

User avatar
Cherek
Posts: 5695
Contact:

Post#3 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:59 am

Ya'll are talking about two fighter races, several of the torpedo races have ships that fall into the situations. I'm at work so I don't have access to ship list that I can compare without having to search the Internet.

As far as the Instrumentality, I agree that is a strong Tech 6 ship, but what tech 7 or 8 ships can the Cylons build? After the Instrumentality, they have to spend 1500 MC to upgrade their starbase in order to build a new class of ships.
The line below is true.
The line above is false.

Cherek

User avatar
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Posts: 688

Post#4 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 12:10 pm

B A N E wrote:Iron Lady,
The rebs would build it for sweep and fronting purposes.
So, the gain in crew would make it useful.
Less so for the Cols because of Ftr sweep.


I think it is still rather underpowered for a Tech 9 ship. It is pretty weak even at Tech 8, really. Consider the value of two, much less expensive, Cygus Cruisers compared to the value of one Iron Lady. I would say the Iron Lady deserves another tube, possibly two. Simulation testing would tell what it should be.

B A N E wrote:Scorpius.
Think about this from the other race POV.
(btw, I agree, 4 engines on the Scorpius is dumb...drop to 3 or 2)

A 6 bay, 180 cargo, tech six ,colonial carrier in the early game?
Early game, how does a noncrystal enemy stop that thing?

Whereas, a 4b/5fb/90cargo is a significant improvement.
Run some sims with a 4 beam SS Carrier for comparisons.
As for fuel issues, CofM has the Cobol and Aries. Small tanks
aren't a real problem for them.

I don't disagree that the Instrumentality is overpowered at T6.


My thoughts on the Scorpius are that in the standard shiplist CoM has no Cruiser class carrier. The TList solution is to drop the engines to three, increase the beams to six, and increase the bays to five. They also increased the price about 100MCr and decreased the hull mineral cost a bit.

I prefer a more powerful, but more expensive, ship. Hull tech seven or maybe even eight, four engines, five or six beams, six bays, 180 cargo and higher cost in minerals and money. This would give CoM a ship comparable to the Robot Automa.

I think it would also reasonable to add a tech six carrier something along the lines of what you suggest: Three engines, four beams, five bays. It doesn't make a great deal of sense that a race that supposedly relies primarily on carriers only has three funtional carriers in its fleet.

I think the solution to the Instrumentality is to increase the hull tech to seven and make the Cybernaut a useful ship. The Robots certainly do not suffer from a shortage of carriers in their fleet.

User avatar
hennef
Posts: 2250

Post#5 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 12:30 pm

the colonials do not need more carriers. they already have 5! 2 are good at fighting, 2 are good a building fighters, one is rubbish. compare that to the rebels: they lack the rubbish-ship. compared to the robots: you have 7 carriers. 3 for war, 2 as toys for fighter-building, 2 for not building. it is not that different. especially when you take all the assisting ships into account. the CoM have lots of useful ships, like the cobol. the rebel has falcons and both have the cygnus. the robot has only one more ship: the cat!

so, if the CoM would get another carrier, the rebel must get that one too AND the robot must get another torper.

if anyone deserves a better fighter-carrier, it would be the empire. give the cruiser another fighter-bay. thats it and go!
have fun!

hennef

User avatar
Shardin5
Posts: 3808

Post#6 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 1:05 pm

Later today I will post the Plist2.4 ships list, I like the balance, of the ships, I don't like the alternate Beam and Torp techs. IMHO
Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference.
The US Marines don't have that problem.
President Ronald Reagan

User avatar
B A N E
Posts: 3777

Post#7 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:47 pm

Hennef touches on the problem of the EE fleet.
What a problem!

If we go through the list and start changing too much, then we
get stretching in the other fleets.

I agree the tech levels on the various ships are schizo.

A logic could be argued that the Torpers should be more adept in
torp ship construction and ftr races are better at carriers.

If we seriously wanted to *fix* the lists.
First thing would be to re-tech the lists within their races.
Sort based upon weapon#/engine#/mass/minerals/$.

Then we could toss in the racial characteristics.
ie:
I would strip all the carrier races but borg of any good torper front.
There wouldn't be a >4 torper in 8,9,10or11's fleets.
There wouldn't be a >5 bay CV in 1,2,3,4,5 & 7's fleets.

Then work in a racial logical construct behind each fleet.

I think I'll go look through a fleet and submit here as an example
of what I'm getting at.

User avatar
Sysop
Site Admin
Posts: 1240
Contact:

Re: New ship list discussion

Post#8 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:08 pm

Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:][avok, if you could, I would like you to move the part of the FHost discussion between BANE and me about ship changes to this thread.

Thank you,

Zaphod Beeblebrox


Didn't work like I wanted. I couldn't move that thread or a portion of that thread and make it append to this one. All I could do was move it from that forum group to this group. It's titled Shiplist Talk
Best Regards,

Joe

User avatar
B A N E
Posts: 3777

Post#9 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:24 pm

Hmm...I just did a quick hack of the bird fleet but it seems my format
won't hold here.

User avatar
Sysop
Site Admin
Posts: 1240
Contact:

Specs

Post#10 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:25 pm

Well if you are all serious about doing some shiplist upgrades I'd like to see some of the new Galactia stuff worked in for the Colonials and Robots.

I'll handle the images for the BMPS 8)
Best Regards,

Joe

User avatar
B A N E
Posts: 3777

Post#11 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:40 pm

Oh great, then I'd have to get back in editpln to fix
resource.pln again for those of us that use VPA.

:-k

User avatar
Sysop
Site Admin
Posts: 1240
Contact:

Post#12 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:56 pm

B A N E wrote:Oh great, then I'd have to get back in editpln to fix
resource.pln again for those of us that use VPA.

:-k



Check the FTP area here.

ftp://ftp.circus-maximus.com/pub/
Best Regards,

Joe

User avatar
B A N E
Posts: 3777

Post#13 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 8:20 pm

I still have editpln...thanks!

Btw, do you know how Klauser imported the Jem Haddar and other Dominion alliance ships into his resource.pln edit for the AQ mod?

User avatar
Sysop
Site Admin
Posts: 1240
Contact:

Post#14 » Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:29 pm

B A N E wrote:I still have editpln...thanks!

Btw, do you know how Klauser imported the Jem Haddar and other Dominion alliance ships into his resource.pln edit for the AQ mod?


I don't. But I'll find out.
Best Regards,

Joe

User avatar
Zaphod Beeblebrox
Posts: 688

Post#15 » Sun Apr 02, 2006 12:37 pm

hennef wrote:the colonials do not need more carriers. they already have 5! 2 are good at fighting, 2 are good a building fighters, one is rubbish. compare that to the rebels: they lack the rubbish-ship. compared to the robots: you have 7 carriers. 3 for war, 2 as toys for fighter-building, 2 for not building. it is not that different. especially when you take all the assisting ships into account. the CoM have lots of useful ships, like the cobol. the rebel has falcons and both have the cygnus. the robot has only one more ship: the cat!

so, if the CoM would get another carrier, the rebel must get that one too AND the robot must get another torper.

if anyone deserves a better fighter-carrier, it would be the empire. give the cruiser another fighter-bay. thats it and go!


I wrote a long, detailed reply to this and before I posted it the power clicked off and it went away. *poof* ](*,)

I'm not re-writing it.

Anyway, the point of my post was that the ship list should reflect the original fiction for each race, and that the point of changing the ship list is that there at least 50% of every race's ships are just junk. The only thing the trash ships accomplish is to confuse new players and annoy them because they don't know not to build these ships. Is that a good plan for the future of the game? Annoy and frustrate new players by "tricking" them into building ships that are a waste of time? I kinda think it isn't a real good plan.

Return to “Project 1: Fixing Tim's List”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron