A general buff to fighters would be nice, but we also need to look at the hanger and carrier cruiser.  These are completely non-viable in the early-game due to how easily they're destroyed and run out of antimatter, which is why we see pretty much exclusively carrier capital ships.  Part of fixing carrier caps is bringing the other classes up to speed, but the other half is also making the cruisers and hangers more competitive early on.

I always thought they should introduce a "PT boat" type vessel as a scout and strike craft killer.  One with high maneuverability and speed but very low shields and damage that could dash (like a Kodiak) and engage strike craft and trade-refinery ships doing enough damage to take a scout out with a single salvo--balanced with a longer reload if needed.

A low-cost ship to garrison systems against lone scout recon and to interdict economic traffic and provide isolated planets a limited defense that could be cranked out quickly and cheaply against lone carrier type attacks.  Make it fast and maneuverable enough to evade cap ships easily and catch scouts.

This would help protect isolated and relatively undefended systems from infiltration and recon by lone vessels, the TEC late game "rebel" ability  and the like.  It would also keep constructions from being nibbled to death by small numbers of stand-off strike craft in systems with no in-place flak defense or hangars.

So... basically a flak frigate with high move speed and damage, but low hull.

Generally speaking, I don't like variant units.  Sins has a small enough roster that I'd prefer something entirely new to what's essentially an alternately-statted version of an existing unit.

"Also that flak get a hefty nerf vs fighters, since those things counter both bombers and lrf, and tend to just kind of vaporize currently." - Kitkun

Agreed.

To me it feels like the carrier cruisers and the planetary hangars just don't have enough squads to really be that effective. You have to build most your tactical slots of hangars to have an even remotely decent amount, and fleet wise you need an absurd number of carriers to boot - which always (to me) seem disproportionately expensive as well (for what you get).

Flak dmg versus fights does need to be reduced, so that fighters can actually get to the bombers to kill them (which they do well enough when allowed to, imo). The flak dmg reduction would probably counteract running out of Anti-Matter a goodly bit. Nerfing flak might just have the effect of everyone bringing even more flak frigates with their fleets though. To balance that out I would advocate reducing the hp of flak frigates or improving the efficiency of light frigates against them (always nice to have more reasons to use LF's!). Flak frigates seem disproportionately tough to kill compared to other ships in their class. I also wonder if Star Bases and Cap Ships shouldn't be given at least some minor flak weaponry (always has seemed odd to me that they don't have any)?

Gah... strikecraft are always a double edged sword to balance in this game. Hopefully someone will find the golden ticket to balancing strikecraft on these forums somewhere!

-Itharus

I'd make its flak very minimal.  It essentially would be a small ship capable of outpacing a scout.  One of the things that bugs me is in rear systems that don't have dedicated standing forces scouts can easily zip through them unmolested.  My view is a ship that could catch a scout before system exit and have time for a single shot (call it a "torpedo" if you like).  It could use these same capabilities on trade/refinery vessels so that's a natural.

The flak capability would not be up to snuff with a flak frigate--it would just be a way to soak off some of the attackers until reinforcements could arrive or be constructed.

It really is the scout interception I am most interested in as that's how the Vasari and TEC are going to get coordinates for their super weapons.  It's also important that the ship "poofs" easily when shot or you end up with a fast scout which totally defeats the purpose.  So it would be in all reality a literal "patrol craft"--just like real navies have all over the world now.  Low hits would keep it from serving as a recon vessel and keep it in its role.

Quite frankly, the flak is there to minimally counter the absurd idea that planetary systems would be completely naked to strike craft unless dedicated fighter hangar facilities were built.  I'd much prefer the option to build defense guns as either flak or artillery--then no need for the flak here at all...and some of that bomber issue might get nicely countered.

Good and similar points here:

Flak ships at present are more like modern multi-role frigates.   A true flak frigate would be much less tough and why not create a flak add on for starbases and even planets? The option to build AAA defense gun/beam/missile platforms at least alleviates this imbalance.  A flak turret doesn't have to be a full-on annihilator either, it just needs to gradually attrit strike craft as they attack to be useful.

On a total side note and only for fun, it would be great fun to be able to build "Q-ships"...ships that were automated and looked like trade/refinery vessels and followed in their same paths but actually had some antiship/antistrike capability.

If everyone is wanting to 'nerf' flak vs fighters. I dont think that will fix the underlying issues but who knows...

The first thing that should change is the accuracy flak have vs each SC.

 

Lower the accuracy vs fighters. They last longer b/c it a nerf to damage more or less. Reduce it to 30-40%

 

Increase accuracy vs bombers. Ups the damage more or less to bombers. Increase it to 85%

 

Numbers are just total shots in the dark. I dont have my txt version of the files with me. Its on my carbonized computer.

 

 

 

This should be a simple change, it might not be all that is needed for everyone to feel its balanced. But its something we can test now by editing a file and see how it works. Another benifit is it wont mess up the damage flak does to any other unit.

I think their squad total is about right.  If we gave them more squads, this would make them absolutely brutal in the late-game where swarms of bombers can kill capital ships and even starbases before fighters and flaks have any hope of knocking them out.

The real problem is antimatter; carriers run out very quickly and simply cannot replace their squads at this point.  Hangers are in an even worse position due to lower regeneration.  Jumping around will quickly deplete your antimatter and leave your carriers running on empty, which means you will not be able to replace dead craft during fights.

Flak frigates give you the best durability:cost ratio of any unit types.  LRF generally give you the best damage:cost ratio, and heavy cruisers generally have the best balance of the two.

Given that flaks cannot focus fire targets, I tend to think this is fine.  They need to outlast the enemy in order to win.  It does leave them a little on the strong side, but that's mostly because LRF counter LF rather hard so there's no good counter to flaks available.

TECs late game ability is easily replaceable fleet.  Unlimited cash and fast building ships means no amount of special abilities can stop you.  Trust me, it works.

I tend to think that such overwhelming numbers indicate you've already got the game locked down on economic grounds.  If Advent or Vasari are keeping step, your numerical advantage will not be so great.

Ultimately this is subjective, but we're in agreement that TEC need to maintain an economic and numerical advantage to win in the late-game.  I argue that they only get that advantage because of a wicked early-game opener, and all other things equal they really don't stand a chance against these combos.

That doesn't address the niggling little things like a single carrier cruiser can come in and nibble away minefields and facilities with no opposition if the system isn't equipped with a hangar or carrier.

Scouts can travel unmolested and indefinitely far behind your lines with little threat from in place defenses and pop minefields at leisure unless you muster a posse or dedicate disproportionate defensive forces just to stop them.

Intelligence is a big deal in combat.  Scouts are the most dangerous force before an engagement your enemy has.  Look at the battle of Midway in WWII--scouts determined the outcome of the entire encounter.

Who would let a scout prowl unopposed behind their lines knowing it was target painting for a kostura or novalith?

Strategy would be improved if these things had the potential to be countered as they do in real life.

Using WWII as an example again, sentry and picket AAA ships were the ones hardest hit in a fleet  by kamikaze and submarine attacks.  Usually the first to sink.

It does make sense to me that flak should be less effective vs. fighters than bombers--that seems a no brainer.

 

I have stated it before, I don't think TEC was that gimped, it was Advent who needed a bit of help.  There are two types of games being played, the big multiplayer games and the 1v1 style games where players get to build up a bit first.  In the multiplayer rush optimized strategies, one or two powerful unit classes, such as the Skirantra, were allowing players to dominate early game.  Back in the fall when I played some 1v1 games, I wasn't having a problem beating very skilled Vasari players.  By comparison, when Vasari was gimped before the scout nerf, I couldn't beat the good TEC or Advent players to save my life if I played Vasari.

I think the small Skirantra & Kostura nerfs are great for tweaking the Vasari early & endgame.  I'm a bit concerned about the Novalith buff, I think it was Advent that needed a bit of tweaking, though I've seen many posts that warn the Advent Supercannon is already too good and shouldn't be buffed any more.  I honestly don't have much experience with how that weapon plays out in a real 1v1 because I don't think I've EVER seen it built in a multiplayer game.

Well, any unit can do this.  If anything, the Ogrov is the most dangerous since it can rip through structures extraordinarily quickly, and flak frigates will clean up minefields before you can blink.

A single carrier cruiser doesn't have enough damage output to seriously threaten structures.  Smack them with light frigates and run them down; if they're too far from home, they won't get back in one piece.

As I've said before, TEC is the strongest faction in the early-game and the weakest faction in the late-game.  I'd prefer to have a more balanced showing on both ends of the spectrum.  I'd agree that Advent needs more help, but again that's specific to the early-game and I would certainly not want to see them stronger in the vs TEC matchup in the late-game.  

I'd agree that there's a substantial difference from the typical 1v1 and 5v5 scenarios, which greatly impacts how the game plays out.



Neither have I.  I think the primary issue is Advent vs TEC, where that mitigation bonus just goes insane and there's little that can be done about it.

A single ship can bomb structures but you can also build a single or two defense guns to completely deprive it of the ability--a relatively modest cost and slot consumption--only they can't engage strike craft at all.

I think planets themselves should have a radius where they do damage automatically versus hostile strike craft.  It could be based on population/type what range and/or damage they do or simply allowing balanced defensive guns with only AAA capability as a choice along with the current ones for star systems seems a reasonable (not to mention realistic and common-sense) thing.  Why would you oppose it?  they would take up tactical slots making you strategize your defense choices just as you currently do and they would make MUCH greater sense for rear area defenses.

As to the scouts, they should be easy to destroy quickly but unless you have many ships/hangars already in position, they will pass right through.  You shouldn't have to station a small fleet or several bomber squadrons just to stop a scout.  that's why I suggest the patrol boat type vessel. It's a modest addition to the game and provides a cheap way to stop infiltrating scouts.  It doesn't keep them from penetrating border systems but it does stop them from passing right through with no problem.

 

The whole point of scouts is to gather information by quickly moving about. You shouldn't be able to stop them effortlessly. Be prepared or get scouted.

Also, bombers don't counter scouts, but fighters do.

 

Turrets will not protect you from Ogrovs, nor will they protect you from LRM's or assailants.  For that matter, their range is pretty wimpy so if you have more than one structure to defend one turret is insufficient.  Furthermore, you can always attack the constructor before it finishes the job.  All things considered, I find turrets quite underpowered and the list of advantaged units large enough that I don't find strike craft immunity a compelling argument at all.

As it stands, the best way to defend against small groups of individual harassers is to have a frigate factory in the gravity well (a good idea on any front-line) and produce a few defenders to chase them off on the spot.  Then send those defenders to join your main fleet, so there's no real cost incurred.

I have no disagreement with "effortlessly"...its the need for massed fleets, heavy ships with attached strike craft en masse to ensure their destruction that's simply absurd or at best unrealistic.

Patrol boats, corvettes and destroyers and even light frigates in real life are primarily built to intercept scouting forces...submarines, patrol craft, etc.  These economical forces free up main battle fleets so they can go on the offense and not be tied down battling nuisance forces.

As it stands right now in Sins, a carrier group with full escort is required to intercept a single Somali pirate in costal waters in sight of land.  It isn't an "either" "or" issue its a matter of proportion.

It also isn't just a "it needs to be more real" bias on my part either.  It adds a layer of strategy to be able to shield parts of your territory from view.

Play any simulation game that has a fog of war and then play it with it off--the suspense, the satisfaction of probing and developing salients and breaches in the enemy line are greatly diminished--or just play Sins with all forces in view to get the idea.

Half the fun is the option of deception.  Scouts are basically unstoppable as Advent (at least over time) due to the nature of their arms (I'm ok with that).  It just shouldn't take the seventh fleet to stop scouts overall.  That's what coastal spotters, land based AAA, radar nets and SAM's do in our day now. Sins should have an equivalent.

As to Ogovs and the like--all cool.  That's reconnaissance in force.  You have to actually bring a fleet to do it and that's what happens when you can't see everything ahead--you have to hedge your bets. 

Scouts should be able to penetrate any system (they can) and their speed and later immunities give them a good chance of even getting to the next one.  They just shouldn't be able to do so "effortlessly" as you stated.

I'll stop here--but there is a perfectly good reason to want these things.

 

Just as a sidenote, is anyone actually playing this version online?  I have logged in a couple times this last week -- the version shows as Diplomacy v1.19a --  and there are usually 0-2 other people on besides myself.  Is everyone still playing regular 1.19?

I went on but the 600+ win and 11 loss player saw me and said, "Cya later"..after asking if "anyone ELSE was on".  He's the only person I've seen on in the past week.  It CAN be played--just have to find someone.

I can't play during the week due to work, but I do show up on the weekends.  What time do you usually play?  Maybe we can have a game tomorrow.

I regularly check beta server but most of the time it's deserted. 

I think reason being because jarasul colonize doesn't work and most people don't have fix for it. A lot was said about it and people are waiting for next beta as well. 

Just remembered. I cannot play on mp because i have fix installed and mesh would differ.

 

I don't usually play, I haven't played since the fall when I was testing out a map -- I don't really have a set time when I'll be on.  I thought people had migrated to the beta server, so I updated my install to the beta vers.  Didn't realize they were still playing regular 1.19.  Oh well....

You can roll back a pre-release. Go into Impulse and un-select show pre-releases. Then select [ctrl]+[shift]+[right click] on Sins of a Solar Empire - Diplomacy. Select 'Verify Installation' from the popup menu. This should only revert the changed files.

Ironically, I have had no problem myself with the Jarusal but I have had two minidumps (mailed  to Stardock) in 1v1 solo games early in the game while engaging militia with a cap ship.  Aside from that has worked smoothly.

Where are the Stardock guys? Haven't seen any posts from them for a while...

Less than a week ago:

https://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/405663

Explaining that there will be no updates in the upcoming week