Ail wrote:
My problem is not that the one with the hero wins. That should obviously be the case.

That is one of my problems with the game, Heroes boost fleets far too much.

Use fleet mobility as a modifier to some sort of "dodge" chance of ships, based on size, and introduce a "grey area" for glancing hits (lesser damage) that is wider on small ships than large ones (dreadnought - he don't dodge, he take it like a MAN). Additionally, check that dodge chance against damage type: no dodge on missiles but a very wide range for damage roll depending on ship size (dreadnought takes 100%, smallest ship takes anything from 0-100% for instance), dodge with medium grey area on lasers (so it's negate, or take a portion of damage ranging from 50-100% or something along those lines) and straight dodge with kinetics (do or die).



I'm not going into the math of this as it's not my job, but here's the general idea:



- As the game progresses, fleet/ship mobility will "compensate" somewhat for the lackluster defenses

- There will be increased incentive for using logistic ships that increase overall fleet mobility, and for using tonnage for engines generally

- Small ships packing kinetics will stand a chance against small ships with missiles.

- Large ship matchups will still favour missiles and lasers, but may be thrown off by medium sized ships with any sort of weapon if sufficient engine power is available.

- Small ships with engine mods will not be the end-all solution, as their loss of tonnage will significantly hamper firepower.



This would also become an excuse for new battle cards.

- Careful aim: Increase aiming by losing one round of fire

- Loose formation: Increase dodge by reducing damage recovery/repair from logi ships, and by sacrificing possibility of nano repairs in next round

- Hold fire: Increase aiming dramatically in next round by holding fire this round

- All power to engines: Increase dodge dramatically by holding fire this round and by reducing defensive power

- Reroute engine power: No dodge this round, lower dodge next round in return for increased weapons power this round (which would compensate for dreadnoughts getting the short end of the dodge stick by turning engine power into a big bat to swat flies with)



I could go on - possibilities are endless. All that's missing, basically, is a second layer of defense, whatever you care to call it: dodge, miss, foozah, carebear power... that would not be significantly modified by hero. Sure, a hero could increase dodge by investing in the fleet movement skills, but that would come at the cost of other skills... if there were a level cap?



S.

Shivetya wrote:
and if your even remotely competitive at that stage of the game you would never be four tiers behind them in weapons or defenses.

Still shouldn't grant you an immunity to damage.

Tredecim wrote:
Yep, science victory, etc...

and if your even remotely competitive at that stage of the game you would never be four tiers behind them in weapons or defenses.

n18991c wrote:
I'n not sure about 4 tiers ahead, but I believe that the correct Sophon play style should indeed put them further ahead in terms of research since that's one of their main advantages.

Yep, science victory, etc...

I'n not sure about 4 tiers ahead, but I believe that the correct Sophon play style should indeed put them further ahead in terms of research since that's one of their main advantages.

Shivetya wrote:
If your four tiers behind a Sophon player in weapons you deserve to lose.

If the Sophon is not 4 tiers ahead, they are doing wrong.



Why should the more advanced player become completely immune to attack?

Igncom1 wrote:
Why should level 1 lasers not do damage to level 4 shields? Weapons should never be allowed to do no damage whatsoever, that's really stupid and prevents a under equipped Hissho player from attacking a Sophon player.



Weapons that do absolutely no damage are completely pointless and would only promote the superiority of technological races like the Sophons.

If your four tiers behind a Sophon player in weapons you deserve to lose.

Igncom1 wrote:
That is one of my problems with the game, Heroes boost fleets far too much.

Agree. I wish one could have far more heroes in the academy but with the heroes' abilities then scaled down... Quantity rather than quality in a way lol

I have a big concern about the current combat-mechanics in combination with ship-levels and heros.



Currently defenses are designed in a way that a defense of the same level as it's corresponding weapon negates that weapon when it uses around the same weight.

That feels relatively reasonable as long as ships with level 1 and no heroes fight each other.



However, when heroes and levels come into play the situation changes. Defenses become so strong, that they completely negate all damage of same level weapons even if they use only a 3rd of their tonnage.



Another thing here is the scaling of weapon-damage and ship-health.



The damage of an endgame-weapon is 30 times as high as the damage of an early-game-weapon.

But even if you stuff your ship with health-modules you won't get much more than 4, maybe 5 times as much health.



This leads to a situation where even a few hits that penetrate the defenses can kill a ship instantly.

This makes defenses an all- or nothing-mechanic.

Too few and they are completely useless because if 2 Hits that pass by can kill a ship it has not helped that 8 of 10 were negated.

But when all 10 hits are negated, the ship is not even harmed. And as I said: When heros and higher levels come into play the latter almost always is true thus rendering fleets without heros completely worthless as they will never do damage.



I think there's a mechanic that in my opinion, would lead to a much smoother and less all-or-nothing combat.



It is Damage-Reduction that is calculated with a Formula like that: DefenseValue/(DefenseValue+100)=Reduction



Many games use an approach like this. I've seen it first in WarCraft III but also in League of Legends and Dialbo 3.



For example: The defense Modules could add, depending on their Tier, 20, 25, 30, ..., 65 Defense to a Damage source.



A starter ship wielding 8 Defense Modules with a Defense of 20 each would have 160 Defense which results in 61.5% Damage-Reduction.

A lategame-ship wielding 15 Defense Modules per type with a Defense of 65 each would have 825 Defense which results in 90.7% Damage-Reduction.



100% Reduction is never possible but good reduction-values can be achieved.



Also you can add multipliers to the DefenseValue as you please without turning it from mediocre to impenetratable.

raccoon_tof wrote:
Even with lategame fleets, proper module selection still makes a large difference. Now it's true that if you have equally skilled players at equal tech with equally matched and balanced fleets, the one with the hero will win every time over the one that does not have one. However - this is as it should be IMO

My problem is not that the one with the hero wins. That should obviously be the case.

My problem is that the one with the hero doesn't even get a single scratch on one of his ships.

Even with lategame fleets, proper module selection still makes a large difference. Now it's true that if you have equally skilled players at equal tech with equally matched and balanced fleets, the one with the hero will win every time over the one that does not have one. However - this is as it should be IMO

Your Superior intellects are no match for our puny weapons!!!

Shivetya wrote:
Only if battlecards become more clear in their effects. Right now some of them look silly when played because they technologies they apply to do not need be present for them to win a round. So I am not a fan of them as they are now.



In regards to Damage reduction. Cap it or give higher tier weapons penetration which reduces the effective DR they face. Damage reduction should also set the bar for the minimum technology weapon required just to do damage. Example, no number of first tier lasers should have any effect on a ship four tiers higher. This is all just a numbers game and it should not be hard to put it into a table.

Why should level 1 lasers not do damage to level 4 shields? Weapons should never be allowed to do no damage whatsoever, that's really stupid and prevents a under equipped Hissho player from attacking a Sophon player.



Weapons that do absolutely no damage are completely pointless and would only promote the superiority of technological races like the Sophons.

Igncom1 wrote:
I still feel like weapons, defenses and heroes should be second compared to the effectiveness of battle cards (While not letting battle cards instantly make or brake a battle).



This way players even with antiquated technology can still have a chance against a hero guided dreadnaught fleet.



Strategy over technology and heroes.

Only if battlecards become more clear in their effects. Right now some of them look silly when played because they technologies they apply to do not need be present for them to win a round. So I am not a fan of them as they are now.



In regards to Damage reduction. Cap it or give higher tier weapons penetration which reduces the effective DR they face. Damage reduction should also set the bar for the minimum technology weapon required just to do damage. Example, no number of first tier lasers should have any effect on a ship four tiers higher. This is all just a numbers game and it should not be hard to put it into a table.

I still feel like weapons, defenses and heroes should be second compared to the effectiveness of battle cards (While not letting battle cards instantly make or brake a battle).



This way players even with antiquated technology can still have a chance against a hero guided dreadnaught fleet.



Strategy over technology and heroes.

I agree. I had used an increase in Hitpoints as a replacement for an increase of tonnage as workaround of the tonnage-bug. However, it still felt relatively little when compared how much stronger weapons get.

Hitpoints could still increase by the level, but increasing everything else as well makes the levels too meaningfull.



My main point is: When a lategame fleet without hero meets a lategame fleet with hero, the fleet with hero takes no scratch because how the defenses work.

It also gains a lot of experience and after a few battles like this it will be able to kill heroless fleets without a scratch on it's own because of the level-difference.

I feel in a Sci-Fi-Game like this advanced technology, superior design or superiority in numbers should be the deciding factor not "leveling up".

Another approach (which could be combined with the above, or balanced for use independently) would be to scale the armor/hp values of the ships better. Though you would then need multiple "levels" of each hull class, combined with better progression of the armor modules, this would also help prevent an "all or nothing" resolution, without removing the current differences in how each weapon class works (which I actually prefer the variety of combat systems, except for the oddities on how bonuses affect missile weapons/flak)



Edit: Or instead of multiple levels, hit points for each class could be based as a multiplier to the available tonnage - that way hitpoints would automatically scale as the ship tonnage techs were researched, rather than having to have additions to the tech tree...