Community Balance Mod - Capships

Option #4 seems like the simplest option, perhaps giving them 500 more hit points, distributed 250 each to shields and hull.

The problem with a community mod is that it's doubtful it would ever get used online.  Trying to get online Sins players to use mods is like trying to herd cats.  Even the Sins Optimization Mod, which might reduce lag and minidumps, is foreign if not inimical to them.

I agree 100%, which is why I said:

The best chance of success might be to get a decent-sized core group of "hardcore" players to dedicate themselves to using the mod - people like yourself and whoever else out there still plays and hosts the big 5v5s.  Back in the day, it was people like Ferdie and a few others who would host these things religiously.  But whoever that group of people is nowadays - get them involved.  Every time they host a game, have it say in the game title "balance mod" or whatever, possibly with even a link to the download.  Beyond that, get players like Darvin, myself, etc. who used to play regularly to play online and use the mod, and see where it goes.

I guess the best place to gauge interest in this thing, and know how many players will be involved to start up the "core group" is right here on the forums, on this thread and the other threads discussing balance mods.

Sorry Agent, put me down for #1.  I don't agree that the idea of adjusting the capitals along their current lines is wrong- some capitals like the Sova and Kortul I approve of in their current form.  I would dispute that the Halcyon is the best capital to base a mod on, but that's a matter of fine distinction, not general approach.

Having said this, if its only a question of 250/250 extra points, then thats only a matter of fine distinction as well.  But not the 2x or 3x options please. 

Players get upset when they lose capitals, especially early.  However, it is usually due to their own poor play, or unavoidable circumstances that crop up in games- like 2v1s, or poor starting position.  Not having that element of capital loss would just detract from the game.  I've been in many games where even the beaten team or beaten player didn't lose all their capitals. 

Late game we may need the counters to mass LRF boosted slightly- boosted abilities on battleships so that they survive the early game, and more explosive mines might help.  However support cruisers can make capital ships very tough.. I've known Vasari capitals to be too strong for entire late game fleets.  They didn't 'pop like balloons', as you suggest they might.  Clever play helps too.  A 'no' to dumbing down.

I agree...even with late-game swarms of Vasari bombers, most of the capital ships I lose are entirely my fault or just part of large battles...either I'm dumb and leave my cap in too long, or I sacrifice it in the hopes that I benefit from its abilities long enough to win the battle...

That being said, I do think something needs to be done to increase their late game resiliency...but I don't think it lies in making cap ships stronger, and I don't think it requires anything drastic...

I'm most in favor of #2, changing LRFs and Bombers...however, this needs to be done very very carefully, because there still needs to be counters against capital ships, and those counters need to be effective and available in the early game...

The idea I like the most so far is Darvin's idea of decreasing the speed of LRFs...this makes it easier to kite with caps or get them out of a hotspot, but LRFs are still just as deadly if you choose to leave your cap in the heart of the battle...reducing LRFs effectiveness against HEAVY armor I think also would make LRFs a less feasible ship to use as the backbone of a fleet...HCs and LFs would become more relevant if LRFs sucked against carriers, flak, and support ships...basically, there would be a huge trade off between making a cap-killing fleet and making a frigate killing fleet...

I also think it would be worth looking into changing phase missiles...it should be a Vasari advantage to be able to kill caps faster than the other too factions, but given the power of bombers and kanraks (both which use PMs), Vasari can do 3 to 4 times more damage against caps than the other two factions...I'd like to see that number cap at no more than 2 or 2.5...

Preventing the subverter's shield disruption from affecting caps might be a start...changing the DPS and shield bypass stats of PMs might also work...if damage was increased but shield bypass was decreased, PMs could be changed so that they are just as effective against frigates as they are now, but twice (instead of 2.5-4 times) as powerful against caps...

I'd have to look at the numbers again to be certain of this...changing shield disruption and changing fighters/sentinels to other weapon types while nerfing LRFs and/or bombers in general might be more than enough, in which case PMs could be left untouched...

Well, it is huge news to me that folks don't believe caps die far too easily to focus fire, and that something needs to be done.  This was certainly a belief held very strongly, by very many, when I used to play heavily.  If most believe the way DesConnor and Seleuceia believe, I guess that makes things much simpler, and my job here is done.

Since one of my main balance concerns with the game is my very strong belief that caps die far, far too easily to focus fire, and cannot perform their function of supporting their fleet, I guess I will remain on the sidelines for any community patch, and for future online play.  I can't be a part of any effort that doesn't address my chief issue.  But I certainly wish you all luck with your endeavors, I guess.

I wouldn't say that...FFing on capital ships is a concern, its why its a concern that needs to be analyzed...Vasari bombers and kanraks are a little too powerful against capital ships...part of this problem is scramble bombers (which is going to be fixed) and phase missiles (which may or may not need to be fixed)...the other problem is the current counters to bombers...right now, the only effective counters are cap abilities...problem is, flak burst and magnetize don't work so well, so one faction is completely out of the loop when it comes to countering bombers....

All of these said problems are going to hopefully be fixed...in addition, all the capital ships (save the top 3 or 4) are going to be more powerful...this in itself may mean that capital FFing is fine as it is, or it may still need to be addressed...

As I said in my post, I think some measures need to be taken (LRF speed and PMs), but I don't think anything dramatic is necessary...I'm not content with the current situation, but it is important that whatever is done, capital ships don't become invincible...

Oh no, this has absolutely nothing to do with vasari, phase missles, scramble bombers, or anything else.  This problem has been around since the beginning of the game, it is endemic to the gameplay mechanic.  This problem was discussed at length on several old threads, way before the last patch which buffed scramble bombers and nerfed advent.  This problem was discussed at length when vasari were widely considered to suck.  This is a major problem requiring a more radical solution than a couple of tweaks here and there.

But hey, I'm not here to argue or change anyone's mind.  If you don't consider it to be that big a deal, fine with me.

I prefer #3, it is something we did in Distant Stars mod and have had much success, it's now preferable to build caps as they are much stronger, last longer and used more often in MP games

heck you can't even win without them

I always wondered why all cap ships are the same cost, a kol should have much more hp's BUT also cost a couple thousand more to build. It would be a strategy to build lots of cheap caps, or save for the more likely to survive type.

us single player guys don't stress this too much.

I'm leaning towards a combination of 2 and 3, but I'm still open to experimentation and different ideas.  I feel there are lots of ways to approach this problem, and it's a matter of trying different combinations to find what works best.

I'm with this myself.  It's partially a problem of easy to FF units having too high modifiers against caps, and partially a problem of caps just not being very tough for their importance in general.  I don't care if caps require a cost increase like what was done in the DS mod, but ALL caps need to have a major presence in battles not just the overpowered ones.  If the non-carrier ones simply can't survive on the front lines long enough to matter, then their survivability needs to be increased.  You should not have to hide your cap in the corner, only popping out to fire off an ability now and then.  Battleships in particular are supposed to be in the thick of it, blasting away in all directions.  They can't do that if they get FF'd and killed in 20 seconds.

The problem is, we can't have the non-carriers overperforming in the early part of the game where you don't have that much firepower.  It's extremely difficult to get this to the point at which they can tank focus fire without being overcome by focus fire too easily.

Carriers get away with this by kiting.  They're constantly running and never let you get close enough to focus fire, or if you are they're warping out.  Other capital ships can do this, too, but unlike carriers they basically have no effect on the battle while doing so.  I don't know how how to address these issues, but I hope with some experimentation we can finda solution.

Most battleships are tough enough to last 30-40 seconds, but the point still stands that they don't last nearly long enough, and if fleets get really huge (like 200+ frigates) they just melt.

I actually like options 4, 5, or 6, on the surface at least.

Option 5 - lowering capship cost - sounds interesting, because it would allow you to scale capship survivability with fleet size by simply deploying more capships than normally possible.  In addition to straight resource cost reduction, a reduction to crew research (the research which allows you to deploy additional capships) can be considered.  If that isn't enough to play with, we could also look into population costs for capships, and other things.

I'm just saying that there's a lot to play with concerning this particular option.  The other advantage is that this type of approach is extremely simple.

I can see a rationale for giving them a few more hitpoints, but anything beyond that will change the entire strategy of the game, which is fine as it is now.  Capital ships are still useful and many good players make more than two, even as things stand now.  At worst they are merely heavily armored seige frigates.  It seems like part of the strategic challenge of the game is keeping the capital ships alive and learning to use them without losing them.  If capital ships are made almost invulnerable then you'll start to see nothing but capital ships.

Aren't there some capital ship enhancing mods out there?

Indeed, but I am unsure if any are updated for Diplomacy. Anyways, I agree with Dirty, a bit more hitpoints and maybe reducing the damage modifier of LRFs against capitalships to 0.70 or 0.65 (from 0.75) should be sufficient. Another avenue worth mentioning might be reducing the amount of experience required for capitalships to level up, as getting them to survive to the point that they can use their better abilities seems to be the main issue here.

Well, if the official strategy of this game is supposed to be "keep capships alive amidst hundreds of lrms and bombers," I guess count me out.

They are useful at colonizing and bombarding.  Beyond that, the carrier capships are useful for deploying strikecraft.  Beyond that, no they are not useful.  If you try to use your capship to do what it is supposed to do - support your fleet - it will not be able to perform that function because even newbs rabidly focus caps like their lives depended on it.

Yeah, you can use your skirantra to good effect because you can kite it all day long (provided it isn't targeted by bombers).  But you sure aren't going to use your mothership to recharge your fleet's shields in battle, or it's going down.

Again, not the type game I've ever been interested in playing.

If you want the "make them invulnerable" route, then other things need to be changed so that people don't build nothing but caps.

I have said it before, for people who want stronger caps that have a really significant impact on gameplay, Distant Stars mod will deliver.  And it has new content which enhances the game experience without really changing anything major about how the game plays.  And it looks and sounds better.   And people ARE playing it online and have been for quite some time.

Chances are unlikely that any one mod will become the community standard because it is impossible to distribute mods via the launch room, but there is no harm in groups of people testing changes to their hearts content to come up with their own personal mod.

Well said

Kharma, I do admit that I personally would prefer a game with more powerful capital ships and believe LRF/Bomber spams are a major concern...

However, balancing the game and...shall we say, improving the game are two very different things...eventually I seek to "improve" the game as I see fit, but right now I think community efforts should focus merely on balancing the game so that all 3 factions are equally capable in MP....

I think there may be some misunderstanding here.  I'm not advocating my own personal flavor of improving the game.  What I have said for eons, and what many others have said too, is that caps don't fulfill their purpose.

The purpose of capships is to "support the fleet."  But you can't have your mothership sitting with your fleet and recharging the fleet's shields, because it will be dead.  That's what I'm saying.  Something that is designed to support the fleet by shield recharging cannot support the fleet by shield recharging because it is dead the minute it tries to do what it is designed to do.

This isn't a problem of IMBALANCE per se, as all caps across all factions suffer the same problem.  Rather, it is a case of BIZARRE balance, of a balance which doesn't seem to implement what that mythical entity known as a "rational dev" intended.  A rational dev would not have created capships to be expensive hunks of junk that essentially do nothing.

The bottom line is, this issue is a "game balance" issue for me, not a "improving the game" issue.  If I wanted to improve the game, believe me I have tons of ideas.  Hell, I'd have an ultimate vasari tech that would allow all vasari starbases to phase jump, which would simultaneously drop the restrictions on number of starbases allowed in a grav well (with compensating ultimate techs for the other factions, of course), and that's just for starters.  But I'm not proposing any of that stuff, because, again, I just want a rational game balance.

There was a time when I was in the mainstream with what I am saying here.  I quit playing the game a while back and moved on, and only have just recently returned to the forums to poke around.  I accept that I may not be in the mainstream anymore on this issue.  If so, so be it, I can just sit on the sidelines and see what people come up with.

I dunno about reducing the amount of experience required to level.  I guess it's not such a bad idea, but the Marza Missile Barrage would need a significant nerfing or you'd see nothing but people playing TEC with lots of Marzas..

^Indeed, but I thought it was something new that people might not realize was even modable. The more options we have the more likely this will come out better.

2 points i may agree with

1) Adjust cap ship cost to be proportional to the ships usefulness, and survivability. If a cap has low hit points, and doesnt do very much to support the fleet. Then it should be a cheap attrition unit. Both in price and cap ship crew usage (1 command point can build 2 cheap cap ships). Where as ships like the Kol, or any with high hit points, and very useful ability's should be the opposite. Very expensive.

2) Nerf the LRM's, and other cap ship counters. However not nerf them so badly as to make them totally useless.

Its a tough call on both sides, because if you buff, or de-buff too much on ether side it just makes matters worse.

A few examples of where we saw ether one extreme, or the other. Does anyone remember the early days of Original Sins, and the Siege Frigate spam? IC's solution was to nerf, AND make the Siege frigs expensive as hell.

Same thing happened with the early era pre-entrenchment light carrier spam. Now light carriers are expensive as hell too despite having more strike craft.

Final example are the pirates. We rejoiced when we found out that the Diplomacy pirates got a buff. However it looks like they got way too much of a buff.

Like i said. One extreme or the other. With no happy medium. This is what you need to avoid with a community re-balance. This is why you need to test, test, and test some more until you are sick of it before finalizing any idea.

Another idea you may want to consider is adding research to the high end cap ships just like the late game cruisers. Just a thought. It seems to work for the SoA 2 mod.

I like the idea of nerfing LRF's and other cap ship counters somewhat. LF's already do a good job at killing a capital ship and they do 50% damage (they just die quick to LRF's). It seems LRF's could have the same damage modifier as LF's and still get the job done from a distance.

Here are my ideas for tweaking capital ships to fit their roles.

Increase target counts per bank for capital battleship and capital siege. I know original Sins didn't have target counts per bank, however this can be done with the expansions. Why not add additional target banks for the Battleships (4 front, 2 side) and Siege (2 front).

Increase per level increase for weapon damage and cooldown for capital battleships and capital siege.

Increase bombing damage or per level bombing damage for capital siege units.

Increase per level anti-matter or anti-matter regen for capital support units.

Maybe tweak hull/armor/shield per level values for all capital ships.

Focusing on the per-level increases would help keep capital ships from being too powerful out of the box but would allow a capital ship to be more formidable after it has leveled up either through experience or paying for the initial level ups.

A slight speed increase to battleships and perhaps support capitals will add enough survivability against LRF.  It is already tricky to destroy a microed capital ship. 

Later in the game there are other options to enhance the defenses of capital ships.  If you make them independent of these the Overseer will be entirely redundant, for example.

Once the abilities on that capital ships other than carriers have been somewhat improved then that will be sufficient.  There are other tactics against massed fleets that just require slightly more consideration in how to deploy capital ships.  Simply strengthening stats risks dumbing the game down. 

Zombies are you going to add this mod and help test it when you're online?  You'd be very welcome, a large part of the concept of a community mod is having a range of opinions based on continual testing.  Ideally players should be able to test the mod whenever they're online- especially those who've played enough of 1.19....

Sure, I wouldn't mind helping out with the testing. Right now it appears the mod is fairly closed from a development standpoint. Has there been any thought of moving this to something like code.google.com so it could really be a community developed mod (that can survive as people flow in and out)? this sight would support wiki pages, issue tracking, downloads and source repository as well as team based development of the mod.

- Zmb5