So, between the HP system and shipyards....

[sayerulz]

I wonder if totally armor based ships are viable? With the HP system, armor is pretty good for protecting ships, but it was a pain to repair all of it. I wonder if shipyards will allow for armor-only ships?

 

[Keptick]

Hmmmm, I would never go 100% armor since even a very small amount of shields would make you avoid unnecessary scratches.

With that said I'd say that it could be very viable against beam ships and even cannons. Might be a bit at a disadvantage against missiles but that's something a solid point defense system could make up for. Just try it, and share the results! Also don't forget to use passive pierce or punch system, I forget which increases armor resistance.

Interestingly enough you'd have more power for weapons and thrusters, I can totally see heavy hitting armor ships becoming a common thing :D

 

[StormWing0]

hmm armor with passive punch-through, pierce, and if using some amount of shields ion effects will turn even a weak ship into a tank.

 

[aceface]

I wonder if totally armor based ships are viable? With the HP system, armor is pretty good for protecting ships, but it was a pain to repair all of it. I wonder if shipyards will allow for armor-only ships?

They are actually very viable, though i still put a little shields, beacuse i d rather not have a fighter leave a dent.

 

[StormWing0]

They are actually very viable, though i still put a little shields, beacuse i d rather not have a fighter leave a dent.

lol same here because I'm know to carpet bomb people with low shields trying to attack me and vanish before they can shoot. XD

 

[sayerulz]

I did some messing around, and found that while armor protects very well against weapons that fire lots of weak shots, slow firing, powerful guns can easily go right through it. The cannon/pulse/explosive guns on a small frigate I recently built can go through 10+ layers of standard armor, even on a ship that still has armor HP. I don't have the exact size up right now, but they are smaller than the main guns on most warships. This is interesting, because most ships I see seem to use rapid fire cannons or beams at their main weapon, which may no longer be ideal for combating capital ships, unless they are very large. I also found that missiles are not ideal for breaching armor, as their damage is more spread out. What the do excel at is decimating ships that have had their armor HP drained, or destroying systems through hull breaches.
I think that the HP system may call for a rethink of how weapons are designed and used, moving away from lock on missiles and rapid fire beams or cannons being the weapon of choice for everything (of course, I imagine many people have already figured this out).

 

[StormWing0]

If you can get it to play nice, Beam + Pulse + Either Explosive or Overdrive can gut ships not paying attention.

 

[sayerulz]

If you can get it to play nice, Beam + Pulse + Either Explosive or Overdrive can gut ships not paying attention.

I can imagine. Peoples cruisers can't repel firepower of that magnitude!

 

[kiraen]

I think that the HP system may call for a rethink of how weapons are designed and used, moving away from lock on missiles and rapid fire beams or cannons being the weapon of choice for everything (of course, I imagine many people have already figured this out).

Do not for get range, speed, and reload in your calculations.

A fast fighter armed with a Bp/Cp is going to be inside the missile envelope of a capital ship for quite some time. And that's a lot of missiles. Making the fight capable of soaking that damage is going to slow it down, making it harder to get into range and more likely to be hit.

A capital ship using the same Bp/Cp as an anti-fighter turret is going to be devastating against a single fighter. Assuming that the turret can track and get a shot off shot off, it's longer reload makes it a one hit wonder. The rest of the squadron will destroy it from out of range with multiple Mp. Or even a whole lot of plain dumb fire, it's not like the turret is going to evade.

Trade offs.

If you can get it to play nice, Beam + Pulse + Either Explosive or Overdrive can gut ships not paying attention.

If they are paying attention, can you even get it into range? What if you miss?

Preferably, from a balance perspective, there should be no single weapon good for everything. I think the balancing is going rather well.

 

[EricBlank]

It seems to work okay from my perspective as well. While missiles are great at hitting small moving targets and making huge holes in systems, they don't penetrate armor very efficiently as their damage really does get split between all the armor blocks in radii working out from the point of impact. Cannons will penetrate armor more rapidly and leave small holes in it, but can't eat up systems as rapidly. Beams just seem to miss too damn much for players to use. I use them for ai craft only, since ai is server side and has better information to guide its shots, but when they do hit they deal damage to armor and systems beneath simultaneously, which means a beam system will hit up your systems even if it can't make a hull breach.

Now, with shipyards that can do repairs, we can field more armor-based craft that can handle a beating. They're going to be slower overall, but still...

And yes, individual fighters will never really, and shouldn't be expected to, be able to stand up to the guns of a large capital ship. Fighters get their value from numbers, coordination between them, and agility to avoid harm. But expect the first hit they take to take them out of action, even if not overheating, more often than not. Fighters should take advantage of weapons that let them repeatedly hit targets weakest points for the entire duration of their presence in its field of fire. If theyre a bomber that relies on hard hitting pulse combos, then hit and run tactics should be used. Don't wait in your opponents sphere of influence while your torpedo recycles, leave. Your goal is to be in range only long enough to deal damage and then leave, its your enemy who wants to keep your bomber squadron in range as long as possible in order to take out more than a handful every run so they can't be hit as hard next time. Beam weapons are probably great for fighters trying to disable larger ships' turrets, by damaging systems beneath the armor. You need only deal at least 50 damage to unarmored systems at depth, though that does rely on knowing the thickness of armor. Turrets probably won't have much more than a single layer on average though, their objective is to mount weaponry.

Admittedly, we have no coordination whatsoever between fighters because of the ai limitations. Fighters right now are either players willing to die a lot or disposable drones that can't really do anything useful because they're tactically retarded.

 

[PriZm]

afaik, beam weapons only apply damage to blocks behind the armor block they hit, if that armor block is destroyed. armor kind of counters the native pierce effect of beam weapons.

Oh, and yes, hitting a target from more than 1km away with a beam, is almost impossible, no matter what the range settings on the server are. Its much easier to hit with a cannon, which also do more damage/block used.

 

[StormWing0]

Beams are hitscan, stop trying to aim ahead with them and you'll hit what you are aiming at. XD

 

[PriZm]

Well... nope :p i wont. Just try it. Go to a server with higher weapons range and try to aim a beam at about 2-3km (not that far compared to cannons). You just wont hit. And i know that i dont have to lead with beams -.- im not dumb.
The AI doesnt seem to have problems to aim beams even at higher distances, with a beam/beam p.e.

 

[Keptick]

Well... nope :p i wont. Just try it. Go to a server with higher weapons range and try to aim a beam at about 2-3km (not that far compared to cannons). You just wont hit. And i know that i dont have to lead with beams -.- im not dumb.
The AI doesnt seem to have problems to aim beams even at higher distances, with a beam/beam p.e.

I really don't get how it's harder for you to hit with beams... You literally just put the cursor over the enemy and press the trigger. You can always just slice over the enemy too. Do you mean that the beam hits are just not registering properly?

 

[StormWing0]

Or he's trying to fire them when they are out of range. Beams stop right at the end of their range so that could be an issue.

 

[karkinosz]

Hitscan weapons don't work past 2k-3k iirc. So it might be that.

 

[EricBlank]

My best guess for their behavior revolves around the target not being where you think it is. The difference between where the server thinks it is when it receives your signal to fire vs where you thought it was according to what the server sent you before you lined up the shot. Ai aim much better because they operate server side, so they always have the most up-to-date information and their action is processed instantly, relative to the 350miliseconds or whatever your ping happens to be.

But that was all an uneducated guess, really >_>

 

[PriZm]

@ keptick:
Its just what karkinosz sayd. I have no problem hitting with beams up to a certain distance, which varies a bit. I think, with default weapon range settings, i wouldnt even have noticed. The hitscan just wont work properly from a far distance. I still just move my mouse right over the target and click, but it just doesnt hit (even for really big targets). It seems to be rather easy to lead and aim a sniper cannon even from a distance, but beam (in theory easiest to aim with) wont hit most of the time. Thats kind of sad, cause i like beam weapons just because it feels so sci-fi and looks cool etc, but if i am to build an efficient ship, i'd rather install a cannon system instead, cause its more reliable (at least when its a human controlled weapon, not talking about AI-turrets).

 

[hakkarin]

Perhaps this has already been said in the thread but I don't think armor only ships would be that practical. There are 2 big problems with the idea of armor only ships. The first is weight. If a ship is going to protect itself using only armor then the armor needs to be very thick, in which case it is going to be very heavy. More weight means a greater need for thrusters, which means a greater need for energy reactors, which means a greater need for yet more armor and more space for said reactors and thus more thrusters. Shields are more space efficient and give protection to the entire ship.

The second problem is that even if an enemy causes only limited damage to a ship that uses only armor to protect itself, that's still damage that will have to be repaired at the expense of resources. Perhaps those repairs won't cost much individually, but the cost will add up over time. By contrast, if a shield can protect a ship then it won't suffer any damage whatsoever and won't require any repairs at all.

I know this is just my opinion, but I feel that instead of creating a thick layer of armor for ships the space is better used for more shields and energy reactors.

 

[Keptick]

Perhaps this has already been said in the thread but I don't think armor only ships would be that practical. There are 2 big problems with the idea of armor only ships. The first is weight. If a ship is going to protect itself using only armor then the armor needs to be very thick, in which case it is going to be very heavy. More weight means a greater need for thrusters, which means a greater need for energy reactors, which means a greater need for yet more armor and more space for said reactors and thus more thrusters. Shields are more space efficient and give protection to the entire ship.

The second problem is that even if an enemy causes only limited damage to a ship that uses only armor to protect itself, that's still damage that will have to be repaired at the expense of resources. Perhaps those repairs won't cost much individually, but the cost will add up over time. By contrast, if a shield can protect a ship then it won't suffer any damage whatsoever and won't require any repairs at all.

I know this is just my opinion, but I feel that instead of creating a thick layer of armor for ships the space is better used for more shields and energy reactors.

Don't forget that shield recharchers chug a lot of power, so the offset of requiring more thrusters for armor isn't as bad as you might expect. Might even take less power then shields, actually.