Topic: restricted ships  (Read 12851 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Laflin

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 130
  • Gender: Male
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #40 on: August 09, 2004, 08:54:58 am »
I would collapse in my chair in an apoplectic fit of joy if I saw a D6G pull in front of my Lyran BC in order to use those phasers.  Oh, the options!

Who said they were going to stay in front of you longer than it took them to overrun you and crack your tail open...  They can keep your shields down quite nicely with only 3 Ph-2s...

That's my whole point.  One overrun (if that), then the commando-boat's sitting on your tail (and away from most of your guns) for the rest of the mission...

Seltorians, on the other hand, might be a bit of a pain in the neck.  I'd probably call for a 1/3 reduction in 'porters to reflect the extra staying power they gain from double internals, but keep the capture mechanic and large marine contingents in place.

Looking at post, BC / DN with 30 BPs and 6 porters?  My ISC DNs have more than that, (like 48 BPs and 5-6 porters) and we're not a marine-happy race like the Klingons or Lyrans... :(

Again, I would fervently pray for someone to do this against even a L-CWLP - it would be glorious :)

Offline Corbomite

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2939
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #41 on: August 09, 2004, 09:23:05 am »
Commando ships are good in teams if played well and rarely viable in a 1v1 (except the SPG). That is not to say it can't be done 1v1, but a simple Starcastling tactic against most Commando ships will suffice most often.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2004, 03:56:08 pm by Corbomite »

el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #42 on: August 09, 2004, 12:14:52 pm »
I always liked escorts in secondary fleet role. Never flown solo.  It makes more sense that way.

Besides, I-CCZ + I-CE fleet is yummy.  I-BCV(44 pwr) + I-CE is yummy too.

As for commando ships in EEK Shipyard missions.  Just try to get within trans. range of the 4xFRDs.  I saw 4x H-FRDs use their combined gatlings to rip down a K-D6G in 10 seconds at range 2 to 5. :rofl:

Offline Kroma BaSyl

  • Romulan Tart
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2276
  • Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #43 on: August 09, 2004, 12:17:02 pm »
When it comes down to PvP if you are in a CCZ, G-BCH, KRC( I never get this one right but the bugger with 10,000 p1s is the one I mean :) ), BCF, BCHPP+, Z-BCH, or OV, would you rather face a C7 or a D6G? (insert other variants for each race as applicable)?

Neither Commandos or Escorts should hold any terrors for a BCH pilot, Tugs maybe, but probably not. So far as Tugs in lists are concerned just restrict them to 3 types (not too concerned about Tugs), but I really can't see any reason for restricting escorts or Commandos. The only ones which might give slight concern are the FED DE line, but even then PGs are not much use above range 3ish, so don't close. Drone boats hate them with a vengence, plasma may too but not as much, but apart from that, no fermented milk products in sight.

Not necessarily against the inclusion of escorts, commando or tugs, but they should be compared to unrestricted ships not OOB ships if the idea is to make them generally available.

Commando ships would be totally cool IMO.

Tugs would be cool too, but maybe just put in 1 or 2 for each race so that they don't clutter up the shipyard and screw with AI draws to much.

Escorts seem cool to me also, not really affraid of them, but maybe limit to a couple of varients that were historically accurate to this front.
♥ ♥ ♥  GDA Kroma BaSyl  ♥ ♥ ♥
GCS Prima Ballerina
GCS PHAT Gorn
GCS Queen Kroma


Because this game makes me feel like  a thirteen year old girl trapped in a lizards body.

Offline TotensBurntCorpse

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 106
  • Gender: Male
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #44 on: August 09, 2004, 01:31:26 pm »
Solo escorts are cheese.   This game does not need more cheese, it needs less.
A fair and balanced shiplist for D2 needs MORE ships removed, not more OTT crap added.
Not entirely sure I understand why this is.
BCHs for example would be more complex to build, more costly and a lot rarer than cheap hulled FF/DD/CL E's regardless of the "systems" in them.
The usual wet navy comparisons show very few BCs (real ones what we call BCHs) and lots of "Escorts" whether they be AA, AS, or GP.
Anyhow in the average single player game, mano a mano, the BCH or even CC shouldn't have a problem, its only us dumb cheesy droners who really need fear all those ADDs and PGs.
Variety is the spice and all that.
What about Commando ships?
Tugs well there are rather a lot, say they were pared down to TUG-A, BT and CVT?

I would propose that only BC n higher be restricted.  Given eveyone uses Drones in #3 make em expensive.   As to escorts being cheaper than BCHs I would suggest that they are similar in Economic price to build but not in combat effectiveness.

IIRC the fed SWAC shuttle cost as much as a frigate to make.  Aegis systems on escorts was VERY pricy.  Phaser G's on fed escorts were copies from the hydrans and thus should be "limited" production of that item.

Offline TotensBurntCorpse

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 106
  • Gender: Male
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #45 on: August 09, 2004, 01:35:05 pm »
Commando ships WERE cheesy when people could use them to get 25,000 PP in and hour running shiyard defense missions.  

This is not the case anymore as the stock Taldren mission have gone bye-bye, maybe they could make a comeback?

Beg to differ....

Found that some klingon ships have ONE MARINE on them.  ONE MAX!!!!!  Talk about captures !!!!!!

Offline TotensBurntCorpse

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 106
  • Gender: Male
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #46 on: August 09, 2004, 01:42:34 pm »
Hmmmmm even in SFB Gatling's are common as muck, F-14s, F-15s, and the most common fighter of all F-16s not to mention others. No good saying it's a fighter variant it still does the same damage put those on ships. FF/DD/CL hulls are mass produced, CC and BCH hulls are not they are much More costly, have way bigger crews, and more specialisms on one ship.

Escorts are used not just for CVAs although the NAC style ones will be reserved for that, but convoy, fleet and patrols duties especially the smaller FF/DD hulls.

Now with the current players are there many who think the Escort is going to take out the CC/BCH! If Squiggy were here you may have an argument, but he is not.

Commando ships, well I disagree with Dog the D6G is not good, its bloody marvelous!( 9 trannies is usually one more than the defendingship has Marines) but seriously if anyone in PvP, in the ships many fly allow themselves to be "captured" by a D6G, don't you think the quodos should go to the D6 pilot or whatever Commando ship! capturing a CC or BCH piloted by a player in an old ship by boarding would be so cool. As for PP farming, what the hell difference does it make if you have a Gazillion PP, there are only so many ships, bases etc you can lay down, and while farming the player is usually out of the action. Lets face it we all farm to get the ships we want just to a lesser extent.

No one has mentioned Tugs. Have they ever been used in a campaign? What are the views

Capturing to get PP is not a big deal....
Feds - GSC 7 trannies CA
Lyran - JPGM 7 trannies CL
Hydran - 4 max on a CA hull - noo good here
Mirak - War destroyers with 6 trannies
Klingon - War destroyers with 6 trannies
etc

G boats are still in the list gentlemen, we have just "eliminated" the ones that are PRIMARILY G boats.  Some of the War Destroyer ships would kick a D6Gs hiney in no time.

As to PP farming, why do u think Missle boats are so popular.

I agree with above comment, who gives a damn if you have a bizillion PP banked, the only thing it would be good for is buying bases. BUT given bases may be destroyable, the missions may morf it into a crappy BS rather than the SB you bought then ?????

I have tried to fly tugs.  There are some interesting variants out there that may be worth flying.  In PvP they tend to be at a major disadvantage in a speed fight.  They attack bases and planets rather well.  Vs Plazma ships they are basically target pratice.

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #47 on: August 09, 2004, 01:43:33 pm »
Solo escorts are cheese.   This game does not need more cheese, it needs less.
A fair and balanced shiplist for D2 needs MORE ships removed, not more OTT crap added.
Not entirely sure I understand why this is.
BCHs for example would be more complex to build, more costly and a lot rarer than cheap hulled FF/DD/CL E's regardless of the "systems" in them.
The usual wet navy comparisons show very few BCs (real ones what we call BCHs) and lots of "Escorts" whether they be AA, AS, or GP.
Anyhow in the average single player game, mano a mano, the BCH or even CC shouldn't have a problem, its only us dumb cheesy droners who really need fear all those ADDs and PGs.
Variety is the spice and all that.
What about Commando ships?
Tugs well there are rather a lot, say they were pared down to TUG-A, BT and CVT?

I would propose that only BC n higher be restricted.  Given eveyone uses Drones in #3 make em expensive.   As to escorts being cheaper than BCHs I would suggest that they are similar in Economic price to build but not in combat effectiveness.

IIRC the fed SWAC shuttle cost as much as a frigate to make.  Aegis systems on escorts was VERY pricy.  Phaser G's on fed escorts were copies from the hydrans and thus should be "limited" production of that item.

This brings up one of those long time SFB questions I've had.
Everything I've read (which I admit isn't much) from SFB says that the PhG's were in "limited production" and only available for a few escorts etc.
Did they ever explain how they managed to stick them on their front line fighters?
I mean unless the idea was that the Fed fighters were so good they never died it would seem to me that you'd need more than a "limited production" weapon to put on them.
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline TotensBurntCorpse

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 106
  • Gender: Male
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #48 on: August 09, 2004, 01:48:55 pm »
After reading the anti-commando ship sentiments, I'm concerned about the Seltorians that I have planned. It's part of their racial tendencies to capture opponents. Now, there achilles heal is they aren't very maneuverable, can't HET (safely), and there offensive firepower is concentrated in the FA arc. No seeking weapons. Purely a directfire race, which means they need to use power to arm and hold all of their weapons. So, they shouldn't be especially fast.

:example:
FF/DD= 4-trans, 10-bp, turn-C
CL/CA= 6-trans, 20-bp, turn-D
BCH/DN= 6-trans, 30-bp, turn-E

Comments from the experienced MP people? There transporter/BP capability could be reduced, but at the expense of removing their uniqueness.


Keep them in.  ppl who are now complaining about commando boats dont realize that they still exist on the ship lists on pretty much all servers (GSC is an excellent example) and if they dont get used much then whose to complain.  The "official" commando boats is what were restricted.  Bad move IMHO but sigh what ever.  Typically tho very few PvP combats end in capture.  In the last year I think I have personally only captured 5 or 6 people (barring them not self distructing),  that is to say with their ships being still operational.  A crippled ship with passive phaser shots any idiot can capture.

So IMHO put in as many marine boats as you want.  Its up to the players to pick the ship that suits their flying style.

Offline TotensBurntCorpse

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 106
  • Gender: Male
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #49 on: August 09, 2004, 01:51:39 pm »
Commando ships, well I disagree with Dog the D6G is not good, its bloody marvelous!( 9 trannies is usually one more than the defendingship has Marines) but seriously if anyone in PvP, in the ships many fly allow themselves to be "captured" by a D6G, don't you think the quodos should go to the D6 pilot or whatever Commando ship! capturing a CC or BCH piloted by a player in an old ship by boarding would be so cool. As for PP farming, what the hell difference does it make if you have a Gazillion PP, there are only so many ships, bases etc you can lay down, and while farming the player is usually out of the action. Lets face it we all farm to get the ships we want just to a lesser extent.

No one has mentioned Tugs. Have they ever been used in a campaign? What are the views

I don't think kudos are really deserving to the commando pilot.

Consider this:

1.  7 Ph-2s, all 7 fire directly out the rear centerline.  At range 0, those 7 Ph-2s are enough to knock down any CL or smaller's shield, and on a decent roll enough to scrap most CAs rear shields.  If not, the 3 forward Ph-2s in a shot or 2 can finish the job.
2.  Maneuverability class B, along with 35 power, means the D6Gs probably going to fly 31, trickle charging phasers.  If the enemy's not doing 31, they can slow down and put up some ECM / reinforcement.  Once they're in range, the speed / maneuverability advantages of this ship are going to let him dictate what shield and range he's going to stay at (which is probably 5-5.99 on the hurt / down shield.  Counter strategy is to phaserboat yourself, doing speed 31 to keep the enemy outside of the magic range.  It takes a while of phaserboating to weaken the commando ship enough to be able to kill him in the 2-minute window at close range...
3.  In SFCs double internal environment, the D6Gs barely going to feel the first alpha strike, and, if he does take a second one, is going to be mildly hurt, not severely crippled and basically ineffective like it would be in SFB.
4.  Once the shield is down, the D6G's putting 36 marines (more than just about anyone's CA carries) in 2 minutes, and can dump enough marines to cap just about any ship in the game within 3 minutes (6 turns).  At that point, the D6G's taking off out of effective range of all weapons and letting the clock run on the enemy ship.

Therefore, in the hands of even a mildly experienced pilot, the commando boat is quite a lethal weapon, as it can take damage (don't forget the barracks are hit on hull, doubled internals, and do not automatically kill off 10 marines with each blown up box...), can effectively kill most any ship in 2-3 minutes of engagement without relying on actual weapons, and, outside of Klink / Hydran / Lyran, all commando boats are armed with Ph-1s, not Ph-2s...

From what I remember (as I was thankfully not the victim of a commando boat myself), this was par for the course / SOP from just about any race's commando boat.

Tugs, on the other hand, have only been flown for "novelty" so far.  They are quite powerful ships, but oftentimes much slower / less maneuverable than an equivalent counterpart.  I don't know if they would be flown as cheese if left unrestricted, as most admins have been keeping them off the lists for now...


HOLD ON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And with the 7 phaser 2's that only fire backwards, assuming they are all used to attack with.... what does the commander do vs the plazma and drones and fighters and and and comming at him???????????????

I have flown the D6G many times, with out a wing man you usually get your a$$ handed to you by just about anything.

Offline Rod ONeal

  • D.Net Beta Tester
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3592
  • Gender: Male
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #50 on: August 09, 2004, 01:53:50 pm »
Ftr gatlings and ship gatlings were explained as different systems. I know they do the same damage etc..., but they are classified as being different and not interchangable. I'm sure that it's just a game balance rule/explaination to stop the Feds from having them on every ship and becoming the equivalent of the LDR with a huge budget and resources and unbalancing the game.
If Romulans aren't cowards, then why do they taste like chicken?

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #51 on: August 09, 2004, 02:52:40 pm »
Ftr gatlings and ship gatlings were explained as different systems. I know they do the same damage etc..., but they are classified as being different and not interchangable. I'm sure that it's just a game balance rule/explaination to stop the Feds from having them on every ship and becoming the equivalent of the LDR with a huge budget and resources and unbalancing the game.

Yup, the fighter PH-G requires more maintenance and cannot be placed on a ship.
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline Gook

  • Catbert
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 405
  • Gender: Male
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #52 on: August 10, 2004, 07:16:14 am »
Ftr gatlings and ship gatlings were explained as different systems. I know they do the same damage etc..., but they are classified as being different and not interchangable. I'm sure that it's just a game balance rule/explaination to stop the Feds from having them on every ship and becoming the equivalent of the LDR with a huge budget and resources and unbalancing the game.

Yup, the fighter PH-G requires more maintenance and cannot be placed on a ship.

Why?

Unfortunately as has been  commented on in the past in many reviews of SFB it  is "in danger of collapsing under the weight of its own inconsistencies" This is just one example. If nothing else were possible you would mount "fighter" modules in turrets, r even the whole fighter, no I'm afraid its a bit of ADB nonsense, just like wanting to put 16 of these "rare" and expensive PGs into a single CL  hull.

Even if you cannot agree with the above, this is SFC/OP not SFB. There is no reason to restrict on "technological rarity" or "difficulty" grounds in this game.
KAT-Gook, OBS,OoW,MTA,SoK.
KAT-Fleet
Kzinti Hegemony

The God of War hates those who hesitate
.....Eurypides



Offline Kroma BaSyl

  • Romulan Tart
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2276
  • Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #53 on: August 10, 2004, 07:38:37 am »


Why?

Unfortunately as has been  commented on in the past in many reviews of SFB it  is "in danger of collapsing under the weight of its own inconsistencies" This is just one example. If nothing else were possible you would mount "fighter" modules in turrets, r even the whole fighter, no I'm afraid its a bit of ADB nonsense, just like wanting to put 16 of these "rare" and expensive PGs into a single CL  hull.

Even if you cannot agree with the above, this is SFC/OP not SFB. There is no reason to restrict on "technological rarity" or "difficulty" grounds in this game.

Actually, there is still the real SFB reason, which is to maintain balance and differenciation amoung the racial flavors. Any other "reason" given in the SFB descriptive/historical comments is just a rationalization for those that require it in order to suspend disbelief, as SVC has said several times.
♥ ♥ ♥  GDA Kroma BaSyl  ♥ ♥ ♥
GCS Prima Ballerina
GCS PHAT Gorn
GCS Queen Kroma


Because this game makes me feel like  a thirteen year old girl trapped in a lizards body.

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #54 on: August 10, 2004, 07:44:59 am »


Even if you cannot agree with the above, this is SFC/OP not SFB. There is no reason to restrict on "technological rarity" or "difficulty" grounds in this game.

Yes there is, to prevent the cheese situation from getting worse.

Every modification I have seen to this game that was not based on SFB has been total crap.
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #55 on: August 10, 2004, 07:47:24 am »
Not every modification, your forgetting the Moggy Z-BCH there I believe.

Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #56 on: August 10, 2004, 08:05:05 am »
Not every modification, your forgetting the Moggy Z-BCH there I believe.

For a non-cannan ship, the moggy BCH is VERY "SFB" if you know what i mean.   ;D
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


Offline Gook

  • Catbert
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 405
  • Gender: Male
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #57 on: August 10, 2004, 08:07:30 am »
Quote

Actually, there is still the real SFB reason, which is to maintain balance and differenciation amoung the racial flavors. Any other "reason" given in the SFB descriptive/historical comments is just a rationalization for those that require it in order to suspend disbelief, as SVC has said several times.


Why do feds get PGs then they are Hydran tech, that is not their racial flavour. The reason they got them was to sell more stuff, because the mass of peeps playing were Feds and they wanted cool gizmos, ADB obliged for fiscal reasons then came out with the racial tripe and fighter rubbish.

ADB really do need a continuity guy :)

If a weapon works, in time of war it gets made, regardless of cost, and other less effective stuff gets dumped. The idea the Feds couldn't manufacture more if they wanted to, having actually replicated the foreign tech in the first place is laughable.

Anyhow none of this is an argument for restricting Fed Escorts in this game.

KAT-Gook, OBS,OoW,MTA,SoK.
KAT-Fleet
Kzinti Hegemony

The God of War hates those who hesitate
.....Eurypides



Offline FPF-DieHard

  • DDO Junkie
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 9461
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #58 on: August 10, 2004, 08:14:14 am »
The idea the Feds couldn't manufacture more if they wanted to, having actually replicated the foreign tech in the first place is laughable.


With all the techno-bullsh*t you promote THIS is now laughable?  :D
Who'd thunk that Star-castling was the root of all evil . . .


762_XC

  • Guest
Re: restricted ships
« Reply #59 on: August 10, 2004, 08:15:41 am »
Anyhow none of this is an argument for restricting Fed Escorts in this game.

The argument is an argument against cheese.

Escorts (like HDW's) have a combat power disproportionate to their hull size. People get sick of facing that after a while.